The Brief

Nineteen hours after leaving Coachella Valley, Oscar Deleon Jr. stepped off a bus with four bags of clothes, $800, admission to Chico State University, and no idea where he was going to live or work. All he knew was that he was taking his agriculture professor’s advice from College of the Desert and transferring to a university to continue his education.

He checked into a hotel. Two days later, at orientation, he learned about the Rapid Rehousing program at Chico State. The program’s community partner, True North Housing Alliance, a nonprofit that addresses homelessness in Butte County, paid for Deleon’s hotel bill. The university transferred Deleon to student housing for the school year and helped him secure financial aid to cover most of the cost.

“When I needed somewhere to go, they were willing to help me out, no questions asked. ‘Let’s get you situated,’ you know? You don’t forget that kind of help,” Deleon said.

Since the program launched in 2020, the College Focused Rapid Rehousing program has helped over 9,000 students facing housing insecurity or homelessness. Through partnering with local community-based organizations, Rapid Rehousing provides students with emergency housing, rental subsidies, case management and advising.

Rapid Rehousing operates at all 10 University of California campuses, 25 community colleges and 18 California State University campuses. Students in the program reported higher GPAs and improved mental health and nutrition, according to an evaluation of the program in 2025 by the Center for Equitable Higher Education at Cal State Long Beach. As of 2025, California spends $31 million annually on Rapid Rehousing programs in higher education. The governor’s proposed budget for 2026-27, released in January, also includes $31 million.

Rapid Rehousing came to the rescue

Following the 2018 Camp Fire in Northern California, Butte County lost over a third of its housing stock, impacting students at Chico State.

“A whole town was lost of housing,” said Emma Jewett, the senior basic needs case manager at Chico State. “Our students are often struggling to get housing and find sustainable housing as it is, because they don’t have the qualifying factors, such as making three times the rent.”

But students everywhere were having a hard time finding affordable housing. In 2018, 10.9% of 27,805 students surveyed across the Cal State system reported they had experienced homelessness in a Student Basic Needs survey commissioned by the chancellor’s office. In a separate survey of California community college students, 19% of nearly 40,000 respondents had experienced homelessness between 2016 and 2018.

Meanwhile, off-campus housing costs across the state increased by more than 30% between 2018 and 2022, according to California Competes, a research organization focused on higher education and workforce issues.

In response, the state Legislature included $10 million for a rapid rehousing pilot program in the state Budget Act of 2019, with $3.5 million going to UCs and $6.5 million to Cal States. Universities applied within their systems to receive grants to participate.

Left to right, Emma Jewett and Leah Slem, staff leaders of the Basic Needs Center at Chico State, stand inside a Rapid Rehousing home in Chico on Feb. 5, 2026.

(

Salvador Ochoa

/

CalMatters

)

Chico State was one of the Cal State campuses initially awarded funds in 2020, alongside Long Beach, Pomona, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, and San José. The state expanded the program to include Northridge in 2021. All UC campuses participated in the pilot as well.

Moving from kitchen to garage to student housing

Rapid Rehousing felt like a “support system,” said Eli Reyneveld, a third-year communications major and soccer player at Sacramento State. He didn’t always want to be a student athlete, but after playing soccer at Modesto Junior College, the opportunity presented itself. “I scored a lot of goals,” he recalled.

When he received a Division I scholarship offer to cover his tuition at Sacramento State starting in spring 2024, he had just two days to accept. He worried whether he would be able to afford moving from his parents’ house in Modesto.

“I wasn’t ready to move anywhere, but I had to just take the jump,” Reyneveld said.

At first, Reyneveld moved into a house with five guys on the soccer team. He slept in the kitchen and paid $550 a month for his share of the rent.

It felt far from a home. It was hard for Reyneveld to get enough sleep, and there were tensions among his housemates. He moved into a different house shared by more of his teammates, where he slept on a mattress in the garage for $800 a month. A full night of rest was just as hard to get as the sound of cars never stopped.

Being a student athlete required Reyneveld to juggle school, traveling for games, training and maintaining a healthy diet. But his living conditions made it hard to eat and sleep consistently.

He avoided telling trainers and staff about his living situation, recalling being “too prideful to tell anybody,” until his athletic performance deteriorated. By September 2024, his trainer pulled him aside at practice and Reyneveld told him everything.

Eli Reyneveld, a member of the Sacramento State men’s soccer team, on the university’s soccer field on Jan. 27, 2026.

(

Aliza Imran

/

CalMatters

)

That week, Reyneveld met with Basic Needs Center staff and, that night, he was transferred into a hotel that Rapid Rehousing fully covered. Three days later, he moved into student housing where he would pay just $500 a month for five months, meals included.

“As soon as I got moved into a room, I think my coach and trainer could tell you, like, my performance is 180. I was a whole new player,” Reyneveld said.

Reyneveld moved out of student housing in February into his own apartment, where Rapid Rehousing is now paying him $200 a month for five months to help with his rent.

“I was about to turn down the scholarship to a D1 because I didn’t have the necessary means to move, but I just took a risk and (it) ended up working out because people are helping me,” he said.

Local organizations help campuses assist students

All campuses with Rapid Rehousing partner with community organizations that connect students to case managers, housing assistance, and academic and mental health support.

Long-term case management makes a big difference, according to Jessica Wolin, a public health lecturer at San Francisco State, who led the Cal State Long Beach evaluation of the program.

“Our evaluation showed the more meaningful outcomes for students who are experiencing homelessness is through this longer term, higher touch, more holistic intervention,” Wolin said. “And those needs are not met with (just) an emergency voucher.”

At Sacramento State, all students in the Rapid Rehousing program pay $500 per month toward their housing costs until they are ready for the next step. Other campuses, such as Chico State, determine students’ costs based on what they can afford. On-campus teams also work with financial aid offices to incorporate emergency grants into students’ aid packages.

Rapid Rehousing also teaches students about managing personal finances, understanding lease agreements, handling roommate conflicts, and planning for housing after graduation. Community partners work with students one semester prior to their graduation date to find housing they can afford or find relatives they can live with after graduation.

“Because these programs are (tied to enrollment), we have to make sure that we structure them so that students have some sense of urgency about the importance of working with us to find their next more permanent and stable housing that will be more long-term,” said Sacramento State Campus Wellness Director Emily Tupper.

ince 2020, Chico State’s Rapid Rehousing Program has provided over 600 students emergency shelter, transitional housing, or grants.

“A lot of students were thinking about dropping out of school and, after, they report that Rapid Rehousing has helped them stay in school,” said Chico State Basic Needs Director Leah Slem. “Our program is a lifeline to these students who possibly would have dropped out had they not received this assistance.”

When R.S., a student at Chico State who requested anonymity due to her international student status, first heard from her parents that they were on the verge of going bankrupt, she immediately went to the university’s International Student and Scholar Services office. In less than a month, she moved out of her off-campus apartment into on-campus student housing, which has been fully covered since November 2024.

With the help of her case manager, R.S. was referred to work on campus at Chico State’s Hungry Wildcat Food Pantry, which helped pay for her tuition.

International students often face unique challenges in college, Wolin said. In addition to not being able to access family support nearby, they are also not eligible for benefits like CalFresh.

“I was kind of going through a lot, but I didn’t really reach out for anything until the water almost got into my nose, and I’m like, ‘Oh no, you know, if I don’t help myself, who can help me?’’’ R.S. recalled. She urges all students to put themselves “out there” and to not be scared to ask for help.

Even with programs like Rapid Rehousing, housing insecurity still affects students across the state. As of April 2024, 1 in 5 community college students, 1 in 10 Cal State students and 1 in 20 UC students face homelessness, whereas 1 in 12 face homelessness in the general California population, according to California Competes.

From formerly homeless to doctoral dreams

The Cal State Long Beach evaluation of the Rapid Rehousing program at eight Cal States and two community colleges revealed how homelessness and housing insecurity disproportionately impacts certain student groups.

Of Cal State students, 4% identify as Black or African American, compared to 18.5% of Rapid Rehousing students. One-third of Cal State students are transfers, but transfers made up nearly half of Rapid Rehousing participants. Three-quarters of Rapid Rehousing students were first-generation, compared to a quarter systemwide. Foster youth made up 17% of the program, versus less than 1% of all students at Cal State.

Wolin said the findings reveal that “the program is reaching who they need to reach.”

As a formerly incarcerated, first-generation and transfer student at Chico State, Deleon recalled how “even having an associate’s (degree) was a big thing” for his family. He enrolled at College of the Desert to earn a 25-unit certificate in agriculture. On his first day, he recalled his professor telling him, “if you’re here for the certificate, you may as well stay for the degree.”

He completed his associate’s degree in agriculture, delivered his class graduation speech, and got accepted by all five Cal State universities he applied to. But after he left a long-term relationship at the end of that school year, he found himself homeless and couch surfing.

At Chico State, Rapid Rehousing helped Deleon remain in student housing throughout the 2024-25 school year while he worked on campus at Project Rebound, a program that supports formerly incarcerated students. In June, he moved into a shared off-campus apartment.

This fall, Deleon will be starting a master’s degree in agriculture at Chico State, and he hopes to later obtain a doctorate. If it weren’t for Rapid Rehousing, he said he doesn’t know if he would have had “the courage to stay in school.”

Deleon just returned from his first plane ride and research trip in Puerto Rico, where he saw plantain, mango, coffee berry and pineapple farms. Agriculture is what led Deleon back to school, he recalled, but Rapid Rehousing kept him in it.

“I’m planting those seeds of getting a Ph.D. now,” Deleon said. “(As) someone that’s formerly incarcerated, messed up his life before he got it back together … now that I have a second chance of getting my life right, look what I’ve done with it, with the opportunity I was given.”

Khadeejah Khan is a contributor with the College Journalism Network, a collaboration between CalMatters and student journalists from across California. CalMatters higher education coverage is supported by a grant from the College Futures Foundation.

The immigration detention center closest to Los Angeles has placed dozens of people in solitary confinement each month since June, according to the most recent data from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

In May 2025, the Adelanto ICE Processing Center had 14 people in isolation. When the Trump administration’s mass deportation effort revved up in June 2025, the number of detainees in solitary confinement there more than tripled. By July, it was 73; by August, 105.

The most recent data available shows that number went down slightly in January, to 74 people.

Ranked by percentage of the detainee population in “segregation,” as it is called at immigrant detention centers, Adelanto is among the U.S.’s top 10 facilities as of January, according to an LAist analysis of the most recent ICE data.

The data shows that of 229 ICE facilities that reported holding people since October 2024, between 50 and 60 usually reported putting at least one person in segregation in a given month. Out of the facilities that did place people in solitary confinement, Adelanto tended to do so less often than others until June 2025. (The facility held just a few people from October 2024 into January 2025.) When ICE’s presence increased in L.A. in June, the number of people sent to isolation in the facility also shot up — three to five times as many people have been isolated in Adelanto compared to the average facility that used any solitary confinement.

Since June, only two facilities have sent people to solitary confinement more times than Adelanto: one southwest of San Antonio, the other in central Pennsylvania.

Both of those facilities held twice the number of detainees as Adelanto on average from October 2024 through September 2025; but the number of people held in Adelanto since then has tripled, growing larger than either of the other facilities to hold an average of 1,800 people a day since October.

More on solitary confinement  

According to ICE, detainees may be placed in segregation for “disciplinary reasons,” or because of:

• “Serious mental or medical illness.”
• Conducting a hunger strike.
• Suicide watch.

The agency also says it might place detainees “who may be susceptible to harm [if left among the] general population due in part to how others interpret or assume their sexual orientation, or sexual presentation or expression.”

Not only is ICE holding more people in solitary confinement, but the agency's data also shows that detainees across the country are being isolated for longer periods of time. Detainees ICE considers part of the "vulnerable & special population" spent an average of about two weeks in solitary confinement each time they were isolated in 2022, when ICE first made the data available. By the end of 2025, the average stay in isolation had risen to more than seven weeks straight.

The GEO Group Inc., a private company that operates the Adelanto ICE Processing Center, has not responded to requests for comment.

How isolation can affect immigrant detainees  

UN human rights experts consider solitary confinement placements that last 15 days or more to be torture, though the U.S. Supreme Court has held that isolation doesn’t violate the Constitution.

The UN also maintains that solitary confinement should be prohibited for people “with mental or physical disabilities when their conditions would be exacerbated by such measures.”

In January, a coalition of immigrant rights groups filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of current detainees, calling for conditions at Adelanto to be improved. In addition to an unsanitary environment and a lack of healthy food and clean drinking water, detainees say solitary confinement is frequently used to punish those who speak out about conditions at the facility.

People held in immigrant detention centers are technically in “civil detention,” meaning that they are being detained to ensure their presence at hearings and compliance with immigration orders — not to serve criminal sentences.

According to the immigrant rights groups’ complaint, one detainee was placed in solitary confinement after complaining about the showers being broken. Another detainee said that, after asking a guard to “use more respectful language toward him, he was ridiculed, written up and given the middle finger by a guard who shouted, ‘Who the f--- do you think you are?’” Then, the detainee was placed in solitary confinement for 25 days.

Alvaro Huerta, the director of litigation and advocacy at the Immigrant Defenders Law Center who is representing detainees at Adelanto, told LAist that when people are placed in isolation at the facility, they’re typically in the same cell for 23 hours per day, unable to receive visits from their families.

For clients who are experiencing mental health challenges — especially those with suicidal thoughts — being placed in solitary confinement “can really exacerbate their condition,” he added.

In multiple statements to the media, ICE has said that the agency “is committed to ensuring that all those in custody reside in safe, secure and humane environments.” The agency has also said that detainees receive “comprehensive medical care” and that all detainees “receive medical, dental, and mental health intake screenings within 12 hours of arriving at each detention facility.”

Huerta called that “laughable.”

“We have countless examples of people who have said that this is not true, that they're not getting the medication that they're requesting, that they're not being seen for chronic conditions and emergency conditions,” he added. “And we know it's not true because 14 people have died in ICE custody this year alone.”

Lori Rovner of Manhattan Beach is a big sports fan, so there was no question that when tickets for the Olympic Games went on sale, she'd be signing up.

She scored a slot in the first ticket drop, which launched Thursday, and logged on right at 10 a.m., hoping to score tickets to the Opening Ceremonies and some finals too. After battling her computer to get through "access denied" screens and a lost shopping cart due to a 30-minute time limit, she bought 16 tickets.

It was only when she was about to purchase that she noticed the service fees, which were around 24% of each ticket. One $2,100 ticket had a $505 service fee, bringing the total cost to $2,604.63.

"It's insane," she said of the fee. "I don't understand what the service is."

As the locals-only sale kicks off and Southern Californians have their first chance to buy tickets to the Olympic Games, some fans are wide-eyed at the high fees on all tickets and the prices in general, which start at $28 but go up to more than $5,500 a pop. Opening Ceremony tickets start at $328.68

The service fees aren't a surprise add-on. The price fans see when browsing the site is the total cost, including the fee. Still, some who bought in the first phase of sales were surprised when they saw the fees add up.

One user on Reddit of shared their cart of 10 tickets, which added up to $11,264. That included $1,038 in fees alone. Commenters responded in shock and awe.

Service fees are standard in ticket sales, but the percentage they charge can vary widely. High fees have been a source of ire for music and sports fans for years. A 2018 report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that the average fees on a primary ticket market were 27%.

LA28 did not respond to LAist's requests for details on the service fee, like what it pays for or why it's a percentage rather than a flat rate.

Not everyone seemed bothered by the prices. Some people LAist spoke with opted for only $28 or similarly priced tickets, even if it meant missing some of the biggest Olympic events. One user on Reddit said they purchased 18 tickets for around $550.

"I went with all $28 tickets," they wrote in the online forum about the Olympics. "I got women’s soccer, gymnastics, beach and regular volleyball, track and field, baseball and a few others."

For some, the ticket process, the prices and the dense web of events to choose from made it too hard to pull the trigger.

Jeff Bartow of Sierra Madre made a spreadsheet with some competitions he was interested in seeing before he logged on to buy tickets Friday.

"So many times, so many schedules, so many events," Bartow said. "I think I initially thought I was going to go to a bunch, but thinking about how crazy it's going to be … I might be a little more limited."

This is just the first ticket drop. There will be more opportunities to buy tickets in the months to come — and on a resale market that launches in 2027.

Some ticket-buyers told LAist they already were contemplating which tickets they'd keep and which ones they'd re-sell, just minutes after buying them.

In the more than two months since the Department of Justice released its latest batch of files on the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, prosecutors have not brought any new charges based on the documents, despite federal lawmakers on both sides of the aisle continuing to demand accountability.

The more than 3 million pages of documents include accusations by alleged victims of Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell's abuse and thousands of emails and photos showing Epstein associated with prominent figures. The files indicate that many of these people maintained contact with the disgraced financier long after he pleaded guilty in 2008 to sex crimes that involved minors. Appearing in the files is not necessarily an indication of criminal wrongdoing.

The release of the Epstein files came after Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which forced the Justice Department to make public all documents it held related to Epstein.

Epstein died in prison about a month after a 2019 arrest on sex-trafficking charges. Maxwell was convicted on sex-trafficking charges in 2021 and is serving a 20-year sentence. Since the release of the files in 2025 and 2026, there have been no related arrests in the U.S. However, the disclosures have led to some resignations and other reputational repercussions for some high-ranking Americans.

The lack of arrests in the U.S. contrasts to the fallout in the U.K., where investigators have pursued charges related to corruption, not sexual abuse, in their dealings with Epstein. Two former government officials — former Prince Andrew and ex-ambassador Peter Mandelson — were arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office. Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, as he is now known, has denied wrongdoing and has not been formally charged. Mandelson has also not been charged, and lawyers for Mandelson have said that the arrest was prompted by a "baseless suggestion."

In the U.S., top Justice Department officials have said that they found no evidence compelling enough to pursue further charges related to Epstein, and that the public can make their own assessments based on the disclosed documents.

In a statement to NPR, Justice Department spokesperson Katie Kenlein said that "there have not been additional prosecutions beyond Epstein and Maxwell because there has not been credible evidence that their activities extended to Epstein's network. However, if prosecutable evidence comes forward, the Department of Justice will of course act on it as we do every day in sexual trafficking and assault cases across the count[r]y."

On Thursday, President Trump announced that Attorney General Pam Bondi is out of the top job at the Justice Department, following bipartisan criticism over her handling of the Epstein files.

NPR asked four former prosecutors and one former law enforcement officer why there may not have been enough evidence to levy additional charges. Here's what they said.

Prosecutors must prove guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt"

Prosecutors must prove to a jury that a person committed a crime "beyond a reasonable doubt," according to Barbara McQuade, a professor at the University of Michigan Law School.

"One of the biggest misconceptions people have is how difficult it is to charge and convict somebody for a criminal case," said McQuade, who served as the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan.

A prosecutor's ethical responsibility is to charge cases only if they believe there is enough evidence for a conviction, McQuade said. Documents, including emails, jokes, and even plane itineraries, can be a place to start, but, alone, they are not enough to prove guilt, McQuade said.

"What you would need [is] rock solid evidence," McQuade said. "You can't charge someone for a crime without sufficient evidence, and I have yet to see evidence of a crime involving an Epstein associate that has gone uncharged."

Based on his understanding of the case, Paul Butler, a professor at Georgetown Law, said he agreed that prosecutors who investigated Epstein's alleged associates "may have believed that they couldn't persuade a jury beyond a reasonable doubt." He said problems with witness credibility or certain forensic evidence can prevent a case from moving forward.

The U.K. cases are focused on corruption 

In the U.K., the two people arrested are being investigated on suspicion of "misconduct in public office." McQuade said the U.S. does not have a single equivalent federal law. Instead, the U.S. prosecutes public corruption through statutes that focus specifically on crimes such as bribery and extortion.

After the release of the latest files, British police began investigating Andrew's correspondence with Epstein when Andrew was a U.K. trade envoy. At that time, Andrew allegedly shared government itineraries, investment plans and notes from official foreign trips with Epstein. The information may have been covered by the United Kingdom's Official Secrets Act.

Similarly, Mandelson has been accused of passing confidential government information to the late sex offender when Mandelson was a U.K. Cabinet minister.

Meeting the burden of proof is especially challenging for sex crime cases

Victim statements are essential for establishing basic elements, such as the timeframe of events, required to build sexual assault cases, said Diane Goldstein, a retired police lieutenant from California and the executive director of the Law Enforcement Action Partnership. But a victim may be reluctant to come forward because of a fear of retaliation, not believing the police can help, believing it is a personal matter, or not wanting to get the perpetrator in trouble.

McQuade noted that in some sex trafficking cases, especially those in which a perpetrator is in a position of power, victims may experience intimidation or threats that prevent them from speaking out.

Victims also may be hesitant to move forward with allegations because they fear having to testify at trials where defense attorneys may attempt to poke holes in their allegations, McQuade said.

Goldstein said that for sex crime cases to advance, investigators need to follow certain policies and procedures. "If you don't have a legitimate police investigation to start, you're not going to get any type of criminal filing," Goldstein said.

Other potential charges are also a difficult path

Prosecutors may have considered pursuing charges of criminal conspiracy related to sex trafficking against people associated with Epstein, said Jessica Roth, a professor at Cardozo School of Law. FBI documents in the files relating to its investigation into Epstein's crimes identify certain people as "co-conspirators."

But Ankush Khardori, a senior writer and columnist at Politico magazine who worked as a federal prosecutor on financial fraud cases, told NPR those identifiers are not "formal accusation[s]" and are simply part of "interim documents."

"The FBI does not determine who is a co-conspirator," Khardori said. "That is a legal judgment that prosecutors make."

But for those conspiracy cases, "criminal intent," in particular, is difficult to establish, said Roth, who worked as a federal prosecutor in the U.S. attorney's office for the Southern District of New York for seven years. Criminal conspiracy charges "would require knowledge and intent on the part of each individual who was charged," Roth said. If a person who communicated with Epstein had some suspicion that he was engaged in illegal activity, that alone would not be sufficient evidence to press charges, she said.

Investigators may have considered charges related to criminal tax violations, McQuade said. But the statute of limitations has likely ended on those cases, she said, meaning that prosecutors can no longer bring charges.

The current evidence lacks context

Legal experts say the haphazard way the documents were released and redacted makes it difficult for the public to understand why no additional charges have been filed.

Roth, the Cardozo law professor, said the information is in "isolation," without the appropriate context. "We'll see an individual photograph that looks perhaps incriminating. We'll see an email that looks incriminating, but we don't necessarily have everything that was said before and after that email and that exchange," Roth said.

One document that could explain why no charges were pursued, according to Butler, is a heavily redacted DOJ memo naming "potential co-conspirators" of Epstein. "The parts that should indicate why the department declined prosecution on any alleged co-conspirators other than Ghislaine Maxwell [are] redacted," said Butler, the Georgetown law professor and a former federal prosecutor.

Butler said those redactions are "unusual" because they do not appear to follow the permissible reasons for redactions in the Epstein documents. Those reasons include confidentiality for Epstein's alleged victims, or anything that would compromise an ongoing investigation, Butler said.

"When the Justice Department grudgingly releases information when pressed by politics or forced by Congress, it also creates the impression that they have something to hide," Butler said. "That there is some cover-up going on."
Copyright 2026 NPR

Nearly 30% more students in Los Angeles County experienced homelessness from 2022-23 to 2023-24, making it the county’s highest rate in the past five years and far outpacing the rate of homelessness across the state in the same timeframe, as the resources to identify and support this student population have decreased.

The UCLA Center for the Transformation of Schools published two reports on Wednesday on the state of student homelessness in the county: “Rising Numbers, Fading Resources: Students Experiencing Homelessness in Los Angeles County” and “Hidden in Plain Sight: Fear, Underidentification, and Funding Gaps for Housing-Insecure Students in Los Angeles County.”

Researchers found that Norwalk-La Mirada Elementary Unified School District had the highest rate of student homelessness in the county — 1 in 3 students, meaning that over 4,700 students were identified as experiencing homelessness during the 2023-24 school year out of a total cumulative enrollment of about 15,600.

The city of Norwalk, where the district is located in the eastern region of the county, was sued by the state in 2024 for banning emergency shelters and other support services for people experiencing homelessness. Last year, the state reached a settlement with the city, which was forced to overturn the ban and put $250,000 toward building affordable housing.

Student homelessness is defined differently under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, a federal law that requires every public school to count the number of students who are living on the street, in shelters, in motels, in cars, doubled up with other families, or moving between friends’ and relatives’ homes.

As a result of this expanded definition, McKinney-Vento includes doubled-up students in the count of homelessness. Doubled-up is a term used to describe children and youth ages 21 and under living in shared housing, such as with another family or friends, due to various crises.

There were a few other patterns seen in the L.A. County data analyzed by the UCLA researchers:

• Latino students were disproportionately more likely to experience homelessness: they represent 65% of the county’s student population, but 75.5% of student homelessness
• A third of homeless students were in high school
• Many districts with the highest rates of homelessness had higher school instability but lower dropout rates

While McKinney-Vento has an expanded definition that includes more types of homelessness than several other definitions, identifying students remains difficult.

The second report from the UCLA Center for the Transformation of Schools focuses on the lack of dedicated funding for school staff to identify and support homeless students. Students and families facing homelessness do not always self-identify, whether due to fear, shame or being unaware that their housing situation is considered homelessness under McKinney-Vento.

“A lot of these young people are dealing with a lot of trauma, so they don’t want to be identified. They don’t want to be pointed out; sometimes it’s scary for them, because they think we’re going to report them to the Department of Children and Family Services,” said L.A. County Office of Education staff interviewed for this report.

School staff, known as homeless liaisons, who work with homeless students received a historic influx of federal funds during the Covid-19 pandemic — $98.76 million for California, out of $800 million nationwide, from the American Rescue Plan-Homeless Children and Youth.

That funding has since ended, and there is no other dedicated, ongoing state funding set aside solely for the rising number of homeless students. This has led districts in California to “heavily depend on highly competitive and unstable federal streams,” the UCLA researchers wrote. Those federal streams have become increasingly precarious as the federal administration last year sought policy changes that would shift how they are structured.