The homeless population in the D.C. region surpassed the 12,000 mark in 2006, and while the number of homeless families dropped 5%, the number of individuals increased more than 20% across the region.

These numbers come from the recently released 2006 Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (COG) Homeless Enumeration Report, prepared by the Homeless Services Planning and Coordinating Committee and based on a one-day count on Jan. 25, 2006.

Despite the increases, some find hope in these numbers. “As large as the number in this report is, it is not so daunting when we consider that it means less than 3 in 1,000 of all people living in the region are homeless, and this is a problem we can solve,” said Stephen Cleghorn, an author of the report and member of the Homeless Services Planning and Coordinating Committee.

Still, in the District alone the number of homeless people totals 6,157, or more than 1 in 100, compared with the city’s entire population. Outside of the District, Fairfax County had the largest homeless population, with 1,766 individuals.

And despite improvements made in many of the Northern Virginia jurisdictions, Loundon County reported a full 100% increase from two years ago. The Maryland suburbs likewise saw a negative rise, with double-digit percent increases in Montgomery and Price George’s counties.

Those increases may reflect the level of resources and not necessarily an increase in suburban homelessness itself, explained Michael Ferrell, executive director for the D.C. Coalition for the Homeless. Essentially, more available beds equates to more persons recorded in the yearly count. An increase in resources in the suburban counties shows that “people can become unemployed in the suburbs just as easily as they do in the District,” Ferrell said. “Homeless persons in the suburbs face the same set of circumstances as the homeless in the city.”

And across the region when it came to homeless individuals versus families, the trends were notably divergent. In the District alone, individual homelessness increased 14% over the past two years, while persons in families had decreased by 8% over the same time period. In Montgomery County, the inequality proved even more extreme: individual homelessness increased 38.6% while the number of homeless families in the region decreased by 12.1%.

“There is always more empathy for families than there is for single adults,” said Michael Stoops, Executive Director of the National Coalition for the Homeless. “Generally, services are better and more professional for families than single individuals.”

Homeless families also work their way through a “centralized and coordinated system of resources,” Ferrell said. The first question that agencies will ask families on the verge of homelessness is “What can we do to prevent this?” he explained. “Is there an outstanding bill, a late rent check or something else?” Those types of preventative resources are offered less to individuals, a lack that may explain the disparities in the numbers, he added.

Additionally, all homeless families are directed to one organization, the Virginia William Family Resource Center located in the District. It serves as the central intake office for all families requesting emergency housing and assistance in the region. There, families receive unified resources and attention. Individuals, on the other hand, face a decentralized system of agencies threaded throughout the regions’ nine jurisdictions.

The apparent disparity between the level of care for persons in families and the type offered to individuals, however, may stem in part from the methodology of the enumeration report itself, according to Darlene Mathews, Policy Analyst for the Community Partnership for the Prevention of Homelessness.

She said that recent policy changes within the Department of Housing and Urban Development have required that the COG now use the federally mandated Homeless Management Information System (HMIS). The result of this new tool, Matthews added, may show increases in homelessness across the board because of improved counting methods and increased cohesion among the region’s agencies, not necessarily because of an increase in the number of actual homeless persons.

The HMIS system has been at different stages of development, but 2006 is the first year it has been fully implemented. “We have more cohesion with other agencies as well as improved counting methods,” said Mathews. “We worked with HUD to develop [HMIS], and D.C. was one of the first agencies to implement it.”

In 2003, in an effort to obtain more reliable collection methods, HUD required that all publicly funded shelters use this system in the creation of homelessness enumeration reports.

The report is more than a yearly snapshot of the regions’ homeless population. It also serves as a guide for HUD in determining where federal resources are allocated. “The reports are a good guide for HUD, and it’s easier for us to make a stronger argument in terms of the resources we need,” said Michael Ferrell. “They [HUD] do pay attention to enumeration reports. It does have a bearing on how the federal government allocates resources.”

Nationally, as more American cities fully adopt the HMIS, the numbers will become more comparable among regions. “These reports all have a shelf life of less than a year,” cautioned Stoops, who also conceded, “at least now there’s a coordinated attempt to quantify the problem.”