[zmnd]

If there were a few studies, and it's overwhelmingly successful, why do you think it's difficult to find the results? SF spends something like 90k per homeless person, conducting an experiment with 3k per person sounds like a drop in a bucket. I bet, showing great results on a group of 100 people, would get more investments into this experiment.

[arp242]

> If there were a few studies, and it's overwhelmingly successful, why do you think it's difficult to find the results?

The internet is big and I just didn't look for it very long.

> I bet, showing great results on a group of 100 people, would get more investments into this experiment.

You'd think so, but policy is often penny wise and pound foolish. I think the biggest obstacle is that "free money" just doesn't fit in our culture very well (or maybe it just doesn't fit human nature).

[zmnd]

> The internet is big and I just didn't look for it very long.

You'd think so, but for the majority of homeless programs I was interested in, I couldn't find any data. For example, I was trying to find efficacy of tiny villages, what are their goals, how they track graduation rate. What's even their success criteria? Nothing, despite my decent google-fu.

> You'd think so, but policy is often penny wise and pound foolish. I think the biggest obstacle is that "free money" just doesn't fit in our culture very well (or maybe it just doesn't fit human nature).

For policies, sure. What about non-profits? Why wouldn't someone who believes in the efficacy of such methodology organize something like that? Changing someone's life for the better with only 3k sounds like a no-brainer to me. I would personally contribute financially and direct other people to contribute.