This paper examines communicating about complex challenges facing populations experiencing homelessness and examining alternative ways to communicate with these populations in times of crisis. Utilizing a case study approach, the researchers focused on cities in New York and California due to the high numbers of unhoused populations and individuals experiencing homelessness within these states. Experts in crisis and emergency management have provided invaluable recommendations on the general protection of life and property; however, individuals identifying as homeless or unhoused share characteristics that heighten their risk and vulnerability, such as lower socioeconomic status, unstable resilience levels prior to a crisis, and geographic disparities. The intersection of these attributes presents unique challenges for emergency managers and relevant public administrators when implementing crisis response and communication strategies, such as one-way written and oral messaging over media and social networks, along with enacting any new protocols needed in relation to the crisis itself, like targeted outreach. This paper discusses the evolution of crisis communication for homeless and unhoused populations, national statistics, along with analysis of case studies for Los Angeles, California, and New York City, New York. The paper concludes with eight major themes related to communicating with homeless and unhoused populations during times of crises and practical recommendations for emergency managers and relevant public administrators.

It is critical that representatives and advocates for populations experiencing homelessness, or are unhoused, are involved in the dialogue and planning efforts. Stable investment in communication infrastructure and crisis communication programs and services is vital to assist homeless and unhoused populations in gaining access to the Internet and cell phone providers, outreach campaigns for printed messaging, alternative locations for media reporting, and receiving critical information during crisis and noncrisis periods. In terms of messaging, crisis-related alerts (oral and written) must be reviewed to ensure clarity in tone to avoid ambiguity and identify and remove any stigmatization language to open a two-way dialogue. Emergency managers and related public administrators must use a diverse array of communication avenues and strategies, such as social media and electronic messages (i.e., cell phones, media statements, and business signage) and traditional methods (i.e., leaflets at social service providers and shelters) with a focus on creating dialogue and empowering individuals to engage and seek out services. In addition, a crisis team dedicated to communicating with homeless and unhoused populations in times of crisis is needed along with dedicated resources for staffing, communication infrastructure, programs, and services.