NAEHCY SPOC Research Findings

NAEHCY Research

Supporting Students Experiencing Homelessness in Higher Education

A National Look at Single-Point-of-Contact (SPOC) Programs — Research by Dr. Stacey A. Havlik, Ph.D., Villanova University

118 Survey Respondents 34 States 8 In-Depth Interviews

What Is a Single-Point-of-Contact (SPOC)?

Single-Point-of-Contact (SPOC) Programs are designated safe and supportive college offices and/or staff members committed to helping students experiencing homelessness successfully navigate college admissions, enrollment, and persistence by providing supportive services and connections to on- and off-campus resources.

118
Survey Respondents
34
States Represented
8
Follow-Up Interviews

Who Are SPOCs?

Most SPOC professionals wear many hats — serving in multiple roles across their institutions. This chart shows how respondents described their primary responsibilities. Understanding these overlapping roles is essential for building effective support structures on campus.

SPOC Roles Across Campuses

Number of respondents identifying with each role (most serve multiple roles)

Why this matters: The fact that most SPOCs juggle multiple responsibilities highlights the need for dedicated staffing and clearer role definitions. When one person handles housing support, student affairs, and basic needs coordination, stretched capacity can mean students fall through the cracks.

How Well Are Universities Meeting Student Needs?

SPOCs were asked to rate how well their university meets students’ food and housing needs on a scale of 1 (Not True at All) to 4 (Very True). The results reveal a significant gap, particularly in housing support — a finding that should inform institutional priorities and resource allocation.

University Performance: Food vs. Housing Support

Average rating on a 1–4 scale (higher = better)

Key insight for liaisons and advocates: Universities score nearly a full point lower on housing (2.29) compared to food (3.02). This underscores that housing insecurity remains the most critical unmet need on campuses — and the area where advocacy, funding, and creative solutions are most urgently needed.

How Are Students Identified?

Understanding how students experiencing homelessness come to the attention of campus support systems is critical. Overwhelmingly, identification depends on students themselves coming forward — a method that can leave many invisible, especially those who feel stigma or don’t know help is available.

Methods Used to Identify Students in Need

Number of institutions using each identification method

A call to action: With 115 out of 118 campuses relying on self-identification, many students experiencing homelessness may never receive support. Institutions must develop more proactive, formal referral processes — including training faculty and staff to recognize signs and creating low-barrier intake systems.

Services Provided to Students

What resources do campuses actually offer students experiencing food and housing insecurity? While food pantries and counseling are widespread, the services students often need most — like transitional housing — remain scarce.

Top 3 Services Offered

Number of campuses providing each service

What’s working: Food pantries (102 campuses), mental health counseling (98), and emergency funds (90) form the backbone of campus support. These services are vital first responses — but they address symptoms, not root causes.

Least Common Services

Number of campuses providing each service

The gap that needs closing: Only 15 campuses offer off-campus shelter or transitional housing. With housing identified as the greatest unmet need, expanding these services — through partnerships with local housing authorities and community organizations — should be a top priority.

How Support Differs by Campus Type

Not all institutions approach student support the same way. The type of institution — public vs. private, 2-year vs. 4-year — shapes what resources are available. Understanding these differences helps advocates tailor their approach and identify models worth replicating.

Private & 4-Year Universities

  • More likely to offer year-round housing options
  • Residential infrastructure provides continuity for students during breaks and transitions

Public Universities

  • More likely to provide advising or coaching specific to food & housing insecurity
  • Often have stronger ties to community-based resources and social service networks

4-Year Universities

  • More likely to offer Swipe Out Hunger meal-sharing programs
  • Dining infrastructure supports peer-to-peer meal donation models
For NAEHCY members: These findings suggest that no single institution type has all the answers. Cross-sector collaboration — sharing what works across public, private, 2-year, and 4-year schools — can help build more comprehensive support systems everywhere.

SPOC Confidence & the Training Gap

How confident do SPOCs feel in their ability to support students? And does training make a difference? The data reveals a critical gap: nearly half of all SPOCs received no formal training — yet training is directly linked to higher confidence and better outcomes.

Confidence Levels: Food vs. Housing Support

Average self-reported confidence on a 1–4 scale

46.6%
of SPOCs report receiving NO formal training — the single most actionable finding from this research. Training correlates with higher confidence and self-efficacy.
Experience matters too: SPOCs with 6+ years of experience reported significantly greater confidence in addressing food insecurity compared to those with 1–5 years. This underscores the importance of both initial training and long-term professional development — and retaining experienced staff in these critical roles.

Key Challenges Identified in Interviews

In-depth interviews with 8 SPOC professionals revealed recurring structural and systemic barriers. These voices from the field provide essential context for understanding why even well-intentioned institutions struggle to meet students’ basic needs.

01

Funding Dependency

Universities rely heavily on external and grant funding to address basic needs — creating instability when funding cycles end or priorities shift.

02

Structural Disconnect

A gap exists between administrators who set policy and frontline staff who deliver services — leading to misaligned priorities and inefficient resource use.

03

Housing Complexity

No institution interviewed had a clear, effective answer for addressing housing insecurity. It remains the most complex and under-resourced challenge.

04

Food: Easier but Incomplete

Food pantries are the most common solution, but they don’t address the full scope of food insecurity — including nutrition quality, consistency, and access during breaks.

Key Takeaways & Calls to Action

This research points to clear, actionable steps that institutions, policymakers, and advocates can take to better support students experiencing homelessness in higher education.

1

Prioritize Housing Solutions

Housing insecurity is the greatest challenge and lowest-rated area of support. Institutions need dedicated housing strategies, partnerships with community providers, and year-round options.

2

Invest in SPOC Training

With 46.6% of SPOCs untrained, there is an urgent need for standardized, accessible training programs. NAEHCY’s resources and professional development offerings are essential tools.

3

Move Beyond Self-Identification

Proactive outreach, faculty training, and formal referral systems are needed to ensure students who need support are connected to it — not just those who ask.

4

Build Comprehensive Support

Food pantries are a starting point, not an endpoint. Campuses must develop wraparound services that address food, housing, mental health, and academic support holistically.

5

Retain & Develop SPOC Staff

Experience builds confidence and effectiveness. Institutions should invest in retaining experienced SPOCs through competitive compensation, professional development, and clear career pathways.

Download the Full Research Brief

Want to dive deeper into the data, methodology, and complete findings? Download the full research brief by Dr. Stacey A. Havlik, Ph.D., including detailed survey results, interview themes, and references for further reading.

This resource is ideal for campus administrators, McKinney-Vento liaisons, postsecondary committee members, and anyone working to strengthen support for students experiencing homelessness in higher education.

Download Research Brief (PDF)

PDF  •  No sign-up required