By Joy Moses
Table of Contents
> The Cost of Being Unpartnered | > The Pool of Married and Cohabitating Workers Is Shrinking | > A Sizeable Share of Married Women Are Now Breadwinners | > Hindering Diversity | > Out of Step with Modern Values | > Conclusion
The homeless services sector is significantly defined by low pay and high turnover. Recent data analysis by the National Alliance to End Homelessness (the Alliance) illustrated that most employees aren’t able to afford their own housing given their current salaries. When asked in the 2023 Alliance workforce survey how they were making ends meet, the second most cited reason – by 51 percent of respondents – was “sharing finances with a spouse/partner.” The current brief dives deeper into one of the field’s unspoken job requirements: marriage or partnership with another income earner.
Government reporting suggests that women have historically been highly represented within public service. Significantly, through much of the second half of the 20th century, women were viewed as secondary earners to primary breadwinner husbands. Within this model, it didn’t matter if women’s jobs were low-paying—their husbands provided for most household needs.
The ghost of this “historical” model likely still haunts homeless services. Among 2023 workforce survey respondents, 77 percent were women, most indicated that their salaries were low, and a slight majority relied on a spouse or partner to help make ends meet.
Over time, the notion of a workforce composed of married women who are secondary earners is becoming increasingly unstainable. It imposes greater hardships on Black women workers. And it discourages the workforce participation of men and others. The data points below explain why.
The Cost of Being Unpartnered May Be Too High
The Alliance’s workforce survey suggests that having a partner to share financial responsibilities is a key factor in helping workers get by on their current salaries. Those who did not indicate having one (the “unpartnered” group) were more likely to report a long list of hardships.
When asked, 39 percent of the unpartnered group said their salaries were simply not enough to cover their basic needs. This number was 11 percentage points higher than the “partnered” group.
Indeed, the unpartnered group was far more likely to say that they worried about paying for necessities like food (14 percentage point gap with the partnered group), housing (15-point gap), utilities (10-point gap), transportation to and from work (9-point gap), and clothing (6-point gap).
Finally, the unpartnered group more often made ends meet via avenues that were harmful to their overall financial well-being and quality of life. For instance, they were more likely to work additional jobs, skip bill payments, borrow money, and rely on charity.
The costs of not having a partner contributing to household expenses may be too high within the homeless services workforce. Reading between the lines, many must be under great stress while trying to stay focused on serving others, likely contributing to the high amount of turnover reflected in other parts of the survey.
The Pool of Married and Cohabitating Workers Is Shrinking
Over the last couple of decades, marriage rates in America have been trending downward. Although more unmarried couples choose to live together, the share of adults partnering together within one household is noticeably lower than in previous eras. In 1967, 71 percent of households had a married or cohabitating couple. Today that number is 58 percent. Workforces modeled on the notion that employees will have a spouse to help them make ends meet have been experiencing a decreasing pool of candidates since the 1960s and 1970s.
The impact of this trend varies by race/ethnicity. Notably, Black households are much more likely to feature single adults, with roughly a third having a married or cohabitating couple. Indeed, the convenience sample (consisting of people who volunteered to participate) for the Alliance survey indicated partnership rates that were similar to the broader society. Thirty-seven percent of Black homeless services employees noted having a spouse or partner who was sharing their financial responsibilities and helping them make ends meet.
Much has been written and discussed about marriage and partnership (and related racial disparities). Undoubtedly, shifts in gender norms and historical and modern-day structural racism (e.g., limited economic opportunity and mass incarceration) have played a role. More could be said on this issue, but the bottom line is the pool of job candidates with a spouse is shallower than it once was. And any efforts to reverse the trend have been unsuccessful (as evidenced by the above chart).
A Sizeable Share of Married Women Are Now Breadwinners
Not only are fewer people married, but women’s incomes matter more to those households.
Since the second half of the 20th century, women’s labor participation and contributions to household income have steadily grown. According to Pew Research Center, 45 percent of married women are now a primary, sole, or equal breadwinner in their homes. Workforces shaped by the notion that women can be poorly compensated because their husbands can carry most of the load are increasingly out of step with a sizable share of modern families. These societal changes likely add to the strain on the homeless services workforce, contributing to high turnover.
Racial disparities are also evident in this area. Black married couple households stand out and stand alone—they are the only racial/ethnic group in which the majority of women (60 percent) are a sole, primary, or equal breadwinners within their homes. Black women’s incomes matter. Their married couple households appear less likely to comfortably afford low salaries.
Hindering Diversity
Creating a workforce that expects employees to be secondary breadwinner women in heterosexual marriages has implications for those who don’t fit that particular mold.
For example, men don’t fit the mold. Whether they are single or partnered, most are still primary breadwinners for their households. Single women and a sizable number of partnered women of all races/ethnicities don’t fit the mold—but Black women workers are particularly likely to fall outside the lines. Women in same-sex partnerships do not fit the mold, and they are more likely to experience economic hardships that make low-paid work difficult. Thus, the homeless services field is likely not a welcoming and comfortable place for diverse workers.
Greater Hardships.
Those who don’t fit the expectation of being a partnered secondary breadwinner withstand unequal hardships due to current pay scales. Indeed, the Alliance’s survey indicated that Black workers in the homeless services workforce experience greater financial hardships than workers overall—although it seems likely that this is for an assortment of reasons that extend beyond their household types (e.g., they were less likely to be in frontline management positions). Black workers, and Black women workers, should especially find current pay scales insufficient to meet their household needs.
Representation and Cultural Competence.
Those who don’t fit the expectation of being a married woman who is a secondary breadwinner may simply opt out of the profession.
A mere 20 percent of respondents to the Alliance survey identified as male. It appears that few men are choosing this line of work; meanwhile, 68 percent of individual homeless adults are men. This demographic difference between the workforce and the population being served is significant. Smaller gaps exist amongst other groups that often don’t fit the mold of the expected worker. For example, 18 percent of survey respondents were Black, while 37 percent of the homeless population are Black.
Thus, pay scales built for married women who are secondary breadwinners are likely contributing to the homeless population’s inability to consistently (without constant role turnover) be served by people whose backgrounds more greatly overlap with their own. This issue may be further impacting consistent access to culturally competent services.
Out of Step with Modern Values
Much of this brief has focused on factors that make it logistically difficult to rely on historical frameworks for setting salaries within the field. However, certain values questions loom large over this discussion.
First, it is an outdated notion that women should have to enter traditional marriages (partially defined by financial reliance on their husbands); our society increasingly understands that women should have greater choices in how they live their lives. There is further concern that financial dependence limits one’s ability to escape toxic or abusive relationships. Second, many in the United States frown upon the idea that women should earn less than men for their work and contributions to society.
Thus, the roots of how the field compensates its employees are likely out of step with modern values, providing another significant reason to chart a new path forward.
Conclusion
Basing a workforce on the expectation that employees will be married or partnered women who can afford low earnings is unsustainable. Society has been shifting, creating a smaller pool of workers who are both partnered women and secondary earners in their households. Those who don’t fit the mold are either experiencing greater financial stressors or are absent from the profession. Diversity goals appear to be frustrated.
There is an additional reason to believe that old ways of thinking about pay scales are not working—far too many homeless services workers say their workplaces are understaffed and experiencing high turnover, hurting their ability to serve people experiencing homelessness, reach organizational goals, and end homelessness.
Moving forward, the field must:
Further a Cultural Shift.
A continued cultural shift within the field (and non-profit work more broadly) is necessary. There is a need for greater discussion around the impacts of current pay levels, but also why they exist and why they aren’t working. Identifying and challenging assumptions behind the status quo is a step towards change while also flagging what needs to change.
Homeless services salaries are less burdensome for secondary earners with a partner. The goal should be salaries that are suitable for primary household earners (i.e., breadwinners).
Generate Resources.
Various actors (e.g., policymakers at all levels of government, foundations, advocates, and service providers) must continue to work together to find a way to ensure appropriate breadwinner salaries, with the goal of stabilizing the workforce needed to effectively serve people and end homelessness. Lessons can be learned from other women-dominated professions that have made strides towards better and fairer pay, including K-12 teachers and segments of the healthcare workforce.
Conduct Further Research.
More research should focus on understanding the homeless services workforce, including the barriers they experience and how to effectively support their contributions to the field. The Alliance’s workforce survey flagged issues related to workers of color, and to a lesser extent, workers with lived experience of homelessness and poverty. Research should further examine issues tied to these (and potentially still other) workers.