senseneres: EVACUATION CENTERS CAN FUNCTION AS HOMELESS SHELTERS

EVACUATION CENTERS CAN FUNCTION AS HOMELESS SHELTERS

I’m aware that some government agencies might raise eyebrows at this proposal—perhaps because of “turf issues,” and you know what I mean. But may I humbly ask these agencies to keep an open mind and give this idea a fair chance? It’s simple: many evacuation centers lie idle between disasters. Why not let them serve a dual purpose as homeless shelters during “peacetime”?

Often, evacuation centers are built and then sit empty for long stretches—unused resources in our vulnerable nation. Meanwhile, homelessness persists. According to recent estimates, there are around 4.5 million homeless people in the Philippines, with as many as two-thirds of them in Metro Manila. Homelessness and disaster exposure go hand in hand—but we treat our infrastructure for each as completely separate. That ends up being inefficient.

Here’s how it could work: the same facility that stands ready for typhoons, floods, or fires can also serve as a shelter for individuals or families who have no place to stay overnight—on one condition: no permanent residents. Like in many countries, these shelters would allow only overnight or short-stay accommodation: sleep, a shower, a meal, maybe medical assistance. Come morning, they’d re-set for the next use—or be ready again for a disaster.

Why this safeguard matters: it means the facility remains available as an evacuation center at a moment’s notice. It prevents “mission creep” into a long-term hostel, which could block its primary purpose when calamity strikes.

Why this idea makes sense

Evacuation centers and homeless shelters address similar needs—temporary accommodation, sanitation, food, safety.
Many local government units (LGUs) already have halls, gyms, or school complexes designated as evacuation spots. With modest retrofitting (partitions, showers, gender-sensitive bathrooms, storage), these could serve both roles.
It’s cost-effective. Instead of building separate shelters for the homeless and separate disaster centers, we optimize the infrastructure we already have.
Disaster resilience meets social justice. Homelessness and disaster vulnerability often overlap, people with no homes are more exposed when disasters hit. Using the same venue addresses both.

What needs to be in place

For this to work smoothly:

Clear policy & mandate: LGUs must amend ordinances to allow dual use of evacuation centers as homeless shelters in non-disaster periods. The recently signed Republic Act No. 12076 mandates evacuation centers in every city/municipality with minimum standards for location and design. A policy update should reflect the dual-use concept.
Designated management model: The same center must have protocols: e.g., at 6 p.m. it accepts shelter guests; at 6 a.m. all guests leave and it’s prepped for evacuation use. Social-welfare personnel manage it when used for homelessness; disaster-risk staff take over when a calamity hits.
No long-term occupants: This rule prevents the facility from becoming a residence of last resort or chronic relief housing. It remains flexible and ready.
Infrastructure fit for both uses: Showers, toilets for men/women, partitions for privacy, safe WASH (water, sanitation, hygiene) facilities, storage space, and durable design to meet evacuation standards (safe from hazards, reachable, not isolated).
Referrals and services: For the homeless guests, there should be linkage to social services, skills programs, reintegration pathways—not just a bed for the night. For evacuees, the full disaster-response chain must activate.
Exit strategy: Overnight stay should be a steppingstone, not an endpoint. The system must help guests move toward longer-term housing, employment or reintegration.

Will agencies oppose it? Probably. But let’s make a reasoned ask

Some wariness is understandable: disaster-response agencies may think using evacuation centers for non-disaster purposes reduces readiness. Social-welfare agencies may feel homeless shelters should be separate. But: the dual-use model doesn’t weaken readiness—it enhances it by keeping the facility maintained, populated, and visible year-round. An empty building deteriorates; a used building stays serviceable.

To the agencies: I ask you to keep an open mind. Let’s pilot this in one municipality or city—test how the arrangement works, identify bottlenecks. See how it can save money and meet social objectives without sacrificing disaster readiness.

My suggestions to move forward

Task the DRRM Office + Social Welfare Department in a city to carry out a feasibility study: which evacuation centers, what shelters nearby, what retrofitting needed.
Initiate a public-private partnership: private sector can support hygiene kits, modular beds, solar lights for evening use.
Engage CSOs and faith-based groups to manage the overnight shelter shift—they know the homeless community and can bring trust, referrals, monitoring.
Build data tracking: number of homeless guests per night, services delivered, average stay, exit outcomes; also make sure the center remains inspection-ready for disaster use.
Release a policy brief for other LGUs: “Here’s how we did it, costs saved, lessons learned.” Make it replicable.

My Final thoughts

Yes, disasters are becoming more frequent. Our evacuation centers must be ready. But the space between disasters—the years, months, weeks when the building stands empty—is an opportunity wasted when people are on the streets with nowhere to go.

We have an estimated 4.5 million homeless Filipinos. Meanwhile, the infrastructure for disaster relief stands idle. Let’s rethink conventional boundaries. Let’s merge purpose with flexibility. Let’s build a system that turns idle capacity into social support and retains disaster readiness.

Let's not let “turf issues” or departmental silos block good ideas. This is not just a policy tweak—it’s a systems-thinking leap. It can save government funds, increase resilience, and restore dignity to those without shelter.

Let’s try it. Let’s implement the dual-use model. And let’s prove that an evacuation center can be both a safe haven in a storm and a safe place in a calm night for someone who has nowhere to go.

Because the measure of our resilience is not only how we respond to disasters—but how we care for our people when there is no disaster.

RAMON IKE V. SENERES

www.facebook.com/ike.seneres iseneres@yahoo.com senseneres.blogspot.com 09088877282/06-09-2026