THERE’S NO question that homelessness is a serious problem facing the state. Just since July 2002, when legislators wiped out the last homeless-prevention program funded by state government, the number of homeless families has soared by 10 percent — from 1466 to 1613. Over the past two years, the homeless population has nearly doubled from 910 families in July 2000 to, again, 1613 today. And children are the fastest-growing segment of the homeless population. Statewide, according to a DTA study conducted last June, there are 2642 homeless children, about 300 more than in 2001. The last time Massachusetts has seen such demand for shelter was in July 1994, when 1206 homeless families sought state-funded assistance.

At the same time, the DTA has come under extraordinary budgetary pressure. Last fiscal year, DTA officials eliminated food stamps and cash assistance for thousands of legal immigrants. They shuttered offices in Athol, Orleans, Oak Bluff, Roslindale, and Northampton. They slashed funding for shelters for homeless adults by 15 percent, or $5.5 million. But it’s not just the past year that’s seen so many cuts. Since 1998, the agency has laid off 29 percent of its workforce. And now, on top of all that, the family-shelter program faces the projected $8.8 million deficit in FY ’03.

The DTA’s original regulatory changes, issued under the auspices of former governor Jane Swift’s administration, were squarely aimed at dropping as many homeless people from the family-shelter rolls as possible to help make up the program’s budget shortfall. "We cannot pay for shelter if we don’t have the money," says DTA spokesman Dick Powers. "If there are fewer people in the system, it will cost us less." Homeless advocates put it a little differently: "The goal is to be able to say to homeless families, ‘You are not our responsibility any longer,’" Bourquin explains.

The DTA’s proposed regulations would have saved the state an estimated $3.5 million by knocking about 10 percent of the homeless families seeking shelter assistance from the state off its rolls — 588 families over the next year. Under Romney’s revised rules, the state will save just $1.5 million; about one percent of homeless families will be cut off from benefits by June. That said, advocates expect that as many as 200 families who would have otherwise received shelter aid will be turned away every year.

ROMNEY WON election, in large part, by taking aim at Beacon Hill. He promised to eliminate patronage and waste in state government. It’s hard to imagine, though, that kicking homeless families out on the street is what he had in mind. For even with Romney’s revised rules, the new policies will bring about unintended consequences, advocates say, though they hasten to note that things would have been much worse under the original regulatory changes. Still, more homeless families on the street will mean more Massachusetts children living in squalor. This, in turn, will translate into greater pressure on the Department of Social Services (DSS). (Currently, the DTA is obligated to notify DSS social workers whenever it terminates a homeless family’s shelter benefits.) Some homeless parents, faced with raising their children in what amounts to unstable and life-threatening conditions, may turn to the DSS for foster care. Barbara Rizzo, a homeless mother from Chelsea who now lives in a Malden motel with her husband, Charlie, and their three young children, says, "If I was kicked out of shelter, I’d have no choice but to give my children to the state. I’m 100 percent positive I’m not the only mother who’d do that." Indeed. According to a 1999 report by the National Center on Family Homelessness, in Newton, 12 percent of homeless children nationwide end up in state-funded foster care, as compared to one percent of other children. But the financial demand wouldn’t simply shift from the DTA to the DSS. More homeless families on the street will also mean more sick poor people. This, in turn, will likely boost demand on the Division of Medical Assistance, whose already insufficient $6 billion Medicaid budget pays for health care for the poor.

To hear advocates tell it, DTA officials could address the family-shelter shortfall by taking measures that are less destructive than limiting access to emergency assistance. They estimate that, of the 1600-plus homeless families now in shelter, 300 actually have vouchers for subsidized housing. These people remain in shelter because they cannot find affordable places to rent. If the DTA targeted its housing services to these families, advocates argue, it could get them out of shelter and open up much-needed space. Likewise, DTA officials could revamp what critics call the "financially inefficient" way in which it houses the homeless. In recent years, the agency has scaled back the amount of so-called scattered-site units, which are apartments the DTA rents for the homeless. At the same time, it has boosted the number of motel rooms it uses, even though apartments cost approximately $1500 less per family per month than motels. Dick Bauer, a senior housing attorney at Greater Boston Legal Services, maintains that the entire shelter program’s deficit would "disappear" if families who are now assigned to motels were put into scattered sites.

Such alternatives, of course, require the DTA to review its practices, a time-consuming process. But the Romney administration could do something to ease the situation immediately — that is, ask for extra money for family shelters. Indeed, the DTA has millions of dollars sitting in a kind of rainy-day fund known as the "Caseload Increase Mitigation Fund." The account was set up by the legislature in 1997 to deal with unexpected demand on the state’s welfare programs. Romney and Wagner, the DTA commissioner, could simply request that the legislature — which must authorize spending from the mitigation fund — transfer money from this account into the family-shelter account, thereby avoiding the punitive regulations altogether. As the Phoenix goes to press, Romney is expected formally to request a $2 million appropriation from the legislature to make up for the $2 million in savings he says he’s "sacrificing" by blocking some of the original DTA proposals. But if the administration fought to transfer all $8.8 million from the mitigation fund into the shelter fund, it wouldn’t have to leave any homeless families out in the cold. As Lawrence points out, "The money is there, and it would prevent families from being left on the streets."

For his part, the DTA’s Powers confirms that the agency’s mitigation fund includes close to $30 million, which "could be used to offset the shelter deficit." He insists, however, that the legislature has to make that decision. "It’s not up to us," he says. Why hasn’t the DTA asked legislators to supplement the shelter program? "In our conversations with the legislative and executive branches," he replies, "there’s been no indication to increase funding in this area." According to Powers, lawmakers have dipped into the mitigation account only twice before — and both times to fund traditional welfare programs, such as cash assistance. He suspects that the legislature is waiting to apply the $30 million toward the same programs in FY ’04. "With the fiscal crisis we’re in," he adds, "it’s a whole new playing field. So who’s to say how things will turn out?" No doubt, things will turn out better for homeless families this year. But the battle to provide the state’s most vulnerable with essential services isn’t over yet.

Kristen Lombardi can be reached at klombardi[a]phx.com