1. Family ends up homeless because there is no legal framework to raise small anymals in urban environments, and the flock is framed as "unruly pets" by abusive landlord/neighbours. Family ends up worse than how they started without help.
2. Family receives the flock, but not any training/resources to tend them properly. Chickens die of illness, malnourishment, or get killed by urban predators (i.e. semi-feral cats). Purpose of the program is defeated.
3. Family just eats the chickens right away, which would be a relief from their situation, but still defeats the purpose of the program.
[Edit: I posted this prior reading the article, and assumed this would be about helping the urban American poor, not the Global poor. I simply could not imagine rural poor people in 3rd world countries not knowing chickens are a good source of income/food. They may still forego the option if they lack other resources to raise the chickens.
So, you may say I stand corrected. Thanks for your polite feedback]