Understanding SF Homelessness Through Data and Human Stories
A research project driven by curiosity and carried out with passion
Role
UX Researcher, Team of three
Mentor
Paola Sanmiguel
Type
Academic project + Research + UX Design
Duration
2024 February – 2024 April
Walking in San Francisco
In San Francisco, losing a job can mean losing housing within weeks.
Why This Problem Matters
What is happening
Timing matters more than income.
People losing their job every month
Housing cost has increased by
Who Is Affected
Big tech employees & manufacturing labor
"Just last year, I was a tech employee in San Francisco, making $120,000 annually..."
Target User group
People who lost their job within the last 30 days
Previously housed Limited savings buffer At high risk of eviction
How might we help newly unemployed SF residents access temporary housing support within the first 30 days, before they fall into long-term homelessness?
Research & Methods
Across different teams and contexts, the same breakdowns kept appearing.
Interviews (>50 people)
We meet people in the street, in the shelter, and who experienced homeless. Total over 50.
Shadowing / org interviews
To understand in a higher level, we also contact Coalition of Homelessness, Homeless Outreach team, and people working for the government, and got the chance to meet them in person.
Secondary research (budget / policy)
To learn the system and how it work, I dig into the public documents, and realize the pro and con of Coordinated entry.
Key insights
The system reacts too late. Housing support should intervene during instability, not after collapse.
Time is the real bottleneck
Access ≠ Awareness
Rules punish instability
Shelters are not perceived as a safe fallback
Solutions
Designing leverage points to change system behavior
Timeline
Job Loss → Housing Loss → Homelessness
[ 30-Day Housing Bridge ]
Access is granted based on time risk rather than eligibility documentation.
Impact
Access is granted based on time risk rather than eligibility documentation.
Why this matters
In existing systems, delays often push people past the point where recovery is possible. By intervening early, the system changes when housing support begins, not just who receives it.
Temporary housing is explicitly time bound and visually framed as a transitional state.
Impact
Users gain immediate stability without losing clarity about what comes next, reducing both dependency and disengagement.
Why this matters
Research showed that unclear shelter rules often discourage participation. Making the temporary nature explicit builds trust while preserving forward momentum.
Exit survival mode before re-engaging with formal systems.
Impact
Users return to caseworkers, documentation, and coordinated entry with clarity and agency rather than exhaustion.
Why this matters
Systems designed for stability often fail people during instability. This design creates a deliberate re-entry point.
Reflection
leverage to change the system, not solving the problem
This project taught me that effective system design is not about solving the entire problem, but about finding the right leverage to change how the system behaves. Rather than attempting to "fix homelessness," I focused on a specific intervention point, the first 30 days after job loss, where a small shift in timing and access could significantly alter long term outcomes.
Designing dignity into systems
Through interviews, I learned that many people avoid shelters not because they reject help, but because current systems often require them to give up autonomy, belongings, or clarity about their future. This insight pushed me to treat dignity as a functional requirement, not an abstract value.