Availability of comprehensive services in permanent supportive housing in Los Angeles

Onsite Primary Care to Address Medical Needs Among Permanent Supportive Housing Tenants: A Feasibility Demonstration Project

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence on interventions to address the health needs of vulnerable patients in permanent supportive housing (PSH).

AIM, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS

Evaluate the feasibility of Project HOPE, a weekly onsite primary care pilot intervention for tenants of a single-site PSH program.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Physicians, nursing, and pharmacy providers work with existing case managers to provide onsite routine and acute care, outreach, and care coordination. Operations began in November 2020.

PROGRAM EVALUATION

Chart review (n = 26) of electronic health records assessed primary care engagement during the 180 days pre- and post-implementation using paired t tests and McNemar's exact tests, alongside formative observations from site visits and monthly meetings. Compared to the pre period, there was a 50% increase in the proportion of tenants with any primary care engagement (95% CI, 0.24, 0.76), and 84.6% of tenants had at least one visit with Project HOPE. Tenants averaged 2.65 more PCP visits during the post period compared to the pre period (95% CI, 1.60, 3.71). Housing staff perceived improvements in care continuity, chronic disease management, and access to care for tenants.

DISCUSSION

An onsite primary care delivery model led to increases in primary care engagement for high-acuity PSH tenants.

Staff views on overdose prevention in permanent supportive housing

BACKGROUND

Permanent supportive housing (PSH) is the gold standard intervention for chronic homelessness, but PSH tenants face high risk for overdose due to a combination of individual and environmental risk factors. Little research has examined overdose prevention in PSH.

METHODS

We conducted baseline surveys with staff from 20 New York PSH buildings participating in an overdose prevention technical assistance intervention study. PSH staff from participating buildings were invited via email to complete a brief online survey about their knowledge of overdose and perspectives on implementing overdose prevention practices in PSH.

RESULTS

Surveys were completed by 178 staff of 286 invitations sent (response rate 62.2%). Average score on the Brief Opioid Overdose Knowledge (BOOK) questionnaire was 8.62 (SD 2.64) out of 12 points. Staff felt very positively (91.6-97.2% agreed or completely agreed) regarding the appropriateness and acceptability of implementing overdose prevention practices in PSH, but less certain about the feasibility of implementing these practices (62.4-65.5% agreed or completely agreed). Most (77.3%) felt it was mostly or definitely true that overdose prevention was a top priority in their building. Most PSH staff (median = 85.0%) but fewer tenants (median = 22.5%) had received a naloxone kit and training in overdose response.

CONCLUSION

Staff feel positively about the acceptability and appropriateness of implementing overdose response practices in PSH, but somewhat more uncertain about the feasibility of implementing these practices. This study's results help hone targets for interventions to help PSH buildings take steps to reduce tenant overdose risk.

Effectiveness of a multidisciplinary outreach intervention for individuals with severe mental illness in supported accommodation

PURPOSE

People living in supported accommodation often have complex care needs, including longer-term mental health illness and physical health comorbidities. Effective coordination between health and supported accommodation services is crucial to address these needs. However, evidence on the effectiveness of healthcare interventions in this setting remains limited. This study assesses the effectiveness of a multidisciplinary outreach intervention providing on-site healthcare for people living in supported accommodation on outcomes related to antipsychotic prescribing and physical co-morbidity.

METHODS

A mirror-image study was conducted to assess changes between pre- and post-service periods. Pre-index outcomes were collected as a cross-sectional measure in September 2020, and post-index outcomes were collected every six months until October 2022. People living at two supported accommodation services in the Capital Region of Denmark were included.

RESULTS

The study included 74 people living in supported accommodation with contact to a multidisciplinary outreach team. The introduction of a multidisciplinary outreach team had no significant effect on antipsychotic prescription patterns, including antipsychotic polypharmacy, high-dose regimens, and combinations with benzodiazepines. The physical health evaluations identified a notable number of participants with untreated or dysregulated physical illness.

CONCLUSIONS

This multidisciplinary outreach intervention for people living in supported accommodation had limited effect on antipsychotic prescribing patterns within the observation period. However, the outreach team identified and managed physical illness for a substantial portion of the study population, highlighting the importance of integrating physical health care into mental health interventions.

A community-academic partnership to develop an implementation support package for overdose prevention in permanent supportive housing

INTRODUCTION

The overdose crisis in the U.S. disproportionately impacts people experiencing homelessness. Permanent supportive housing (PSH) - permanent, affordable housing with voluntary support services - is an effective, evidence-based intervention to address homelessness. However, overdose risk remains high even after entering PSH for individual and structural reasons. In this study, we aimed to refine a set of evidence-based overdose prevention practices (EBPs) and an associated implementation support package for PSH settings using focus groups with PSH tenants, frontline staff, and leaders.

METHODS

Our community-academic team identified an initial set of overdose EBPs applicable for PSH through research, public health guidance, and a needs assessment. We adapted these practices based on feedback from focus groups with PSH leaders, staff, and tenants. Focus groups followed semi-structured interview guides developed using the EPIS (Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment) framework constructs of inner context, outer context, and bridging factors related to overdose prevention and response.

RESULTS

We conducted 16 focus groups with 40 unique participants (14 PSH tenants, 15 PSH staff, 11 PSH leaders); focus groups were held in two iterative rounds and individuals could participate in one or both rounds. Participants were diverse in gender, race, and ethnicity. Focus group participants were enthusiastic about the proposed EBPs and implementation strategies, while contributing unique insights and concrete suggestions to improve upon them. The implementation support package contains an iteratively refined PSH Overdose Prevention (POP) Toolkit with 20 EBPs surrounding overdose prevention and response, harm reduction, and support for substance use treatment and additional core implementation strategies including practice facilitation, tenant-staff champion teams, and learning collaboratives.

CONCLUSIONS

This manuscript describes how robust community-academic partnerships and input from people with lived experience as tenants and staff in PSH informed adaptation of evidence-based overdose prevention approaches and implementation strategies to improve their fit for PSH settings. This effort can inform similar efforts nationally in other settings serving highly marginalized populations. We are currently conducting a randomized trial of the refined overdose prevention implementation support package in PSH.

Housing for care, connection, and health equity

Researchers and policymakers have used a four-pillar framework- condition, consistency, context, and cost-to describe the characteristics of housing that are important for health equity. We propose adding a fifth pillar: care and connection. Housing for care and connection refers to the housing design, institutional policies, and housing programs that strengthen social connections, caregiving relationships, access to resources, and a sense of self in community. Attending to these needs in housing is especially important for people who are in transition in and out of homelessness, living in poverty, are very young or very old, or living with a disability or activity limitation.

Placement into Scattered-Site or Place-Based Permanent Supportive Housing in Los Angeles County, CA, During the COVID-19 Pandemic

There are two dominant approaches to implementing permanent supportive housing (PSH), namely place-based (PB) and scattered-site (SS). Formal guidance does not distinguish between these two models and only specifies that PSH should be reserved for those who are most vulnerable with complex health needs. To consider both system- and self-selection factors that may affect housing assignment, this study applied the Gelberg-Anderson behavioral model for vulnerable populations to compare predisposing, enabling, and need factors among people experiencing homelessness (PE) by whether they were assigned to PB-PSH (n = 272) or SS-PSH (n = 185) in Los Angeles County during the COVID-19 pandemic. This exploratory, observational study also included those who were approved but did not receive PSH (n = 94). Results show that there are notable differences between (a) those who received PSH versus those who did not, and (b) those in PB-PSH versus SS-PSH. Specifically, PEH who received PSH were more likely to be white, US-born, have any physical health condition, and have lower health activation scores. PEH who received PB- versus SS-PSH were more likely to be older, Black, have any alcohol use disorder, and have higher health activation scores. These findings suggest that homeless service systems may consider PB-PSH more appropriate for PEH with higher needs but also raises important questions about how race may be a factor in the type of PSH that PEH receive and whether PSH is received at all.

Using alone at home: What's missing in housing-based responses to the overdose crisis?

BACKGROUND

Against the backdrop of North America's overdose crisis, most overdose deaths are occurring in housing environments, largely due to individuals using drugs alone. Overdose deaths in cities remain concentrated in marginal housing environments (e.g., single-room occupancy housing, shelters), which are often the only forms of housing available to urban poor and drug-using communities. This commentary aims to highlight current housing-based overdose prevention interventions and to situate them within the broader environmental contexts of marginal housing. In doing so, we call attention to the need to better understand marginal housing as sites of overdose vulnerability and public health intervention to optimize responses to the overdose crisis.

HARM REDUCTION AND OVERDOSE PREVENTION IN HOUSING

In response to high overdose rates in marginal housing environments several interventions (e.g., housing-based supervised consumption rooms, peer-witnessed injection) have recently been implemented in select jurisdictions. However, even with the growing recognition of marginal housing as a key intervention site, housing-based interventions have yet to be scaled up in a meaningful way. Further, there have been persistent challenges to tailoring these approaches to address dynamics within housing environments. Thus, while it is critical to expand coverage of housing-based interventions across marginal housing environments, these interventions must also attend to the contextual drivers of risks in these settings to best foster enabling environments for harm reduction and maximize impacts.

CONCLUSION

Emerging housing-focused interventions are designed to address key drivers of overdose risk (e.g., using alone, toxic drug supply). Yet, broader contextual factors (e.g., drug criminalization, housing quality, gender) are equally critical factors that shape how structurally vulnerable people who use drugs navigate and engage with harm reduction interventions. A more comprehensive understanding of these contextual factors within housing environments is needed to inform policy and programmatic interventions that are responsive to the needs of people who use drugs in these settings.

"You Need to Keep It Going, Mind, Body, and Spirit": Older Adults' Perspectives on Aging in Place in Subsidized Housing

In the U.S., more than one million older adults with low incomes live in apartment buildings subsidized by the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit. Although this population experiences disproportionate rates of nursing home admission, little is known about residents' perspectives on factors that influence their ability to live independently in these settings. Fifty-eight residents aged 62 and older and eight study partners participated in qualitative interviews about their perspectives on living independently in subsidized housing, including barriers and facilitators. We analyzed transcripts using a hybrid inductive and deductive approach to qualitative thematic analysis. Barriers and facilitators for living independently in subsidized housing related to the influence of the social and physical environment on individuals' experiences of living independently, including factors unique to subsidized housing. Findings suggest how interventions to optimize functional status and promote independence among older adults living in subsidized housing can build on existing strengths of the subsidized housing environment to improve outcomes.

The POP (Permanent Supportive Housing Overdose Prevention) Study: protocol for a hybrid type 3 stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Permanent supportive housing (PSH)-subsidized housing paired with support services such as case management-is a key part of national strategic plans to end homelessness. PSH tenants face high overdose risk due to a confluence of individual and environmental risk factors, yet little research has examined overdose prevention in PSH.

METHODS

We describe the protocol for a hybrid type 3 stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) of overdose prevention practice implementation in PSH. We adapted evidence-based overdose prevention practices and implementation strategies for PSH using input from stakeholder focus groups. The trial will include 20 PSH buildings (with building size ranging from 20 to over 150 tenants) across New York City and New York's Capital Region. Buildings will be randomized to one of four 6-month intervention waves during which they will receive a package of implementation support including training in using a PSH Overdose Prevention (POP) Toolkit, time-limited practice facilitation, and learning collaboratives delivered to staff and tenant implementation champions appointed by each building. The primary outcome is building-level fidelity to a defined list of overdose prevention practices. Secondary and exploratory implementation and effectiveness outcomes will be examined using PSH staff and tenant survey questionnaires, and analysis of tenant Medicaid data. We will explore factors related to implementation success, including barriers and facilitators, using qualitative interviews with key stakeholders. The project is being conducted through an academic-community partnership, and an Advisory Board including PSH tenants and other key stakeholders will be engaged in all stages of the project.

DISCUSSION

We describe the protocol for a hybrid type 3 stepped-wedge cluster RCT of overdose prevention practice implementation in PSH. This study will be the first controlled trial of overdose prevention implementation in PSH settings. The research will make a significant impact by testing and informing future implementation strategies to prevent overdose for a population at particularly high risk for overdose mortality. Findings from this PSH-focused research are expected to be broadly applicable to other housing settings and settings serving people experiencing homelessness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05786222 , registered 27 March 2023.

Investigating the Comparative Effectiveness of Place-Based and Scatter-Site Permanent Supportive Housing for People Experiencing Homelessness During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Protocols for a Mixed Methods, Prospective Longitudinal Study

BACKGROUND

Permanent supportive housing (PSH) is an evidence-based practice to address homelessness that is implemented using 2 distinct approaches. The first approach is place-based PSH (PB-PSH), or single-site housing placement, in which an entire building with on-site services is designated for people experiencing homelessness. The second approach is scatter-site PSH (SS-PSH), which uses apartments rented from a private landlord while providing mobile case management services.

OBJECTIVE

This paper describes the protocols for a mixed methods comparative effectiveness study of 2 distinct approaches to implementing PSH and the patient-centered quality of life, health care use, and health behaviors that reduce COVID-19 risk.

METHODS

People experiencing homelessness who are placed in either PB-PSH or SS-PSH completed 6 monthly surveys after move-in using smartphones provided by the study team. A subsample of participants completed 3 qualitative interviews at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months that included photo elicitation interviewing. Two stakeholder advisory groups, including one featuring people with lived experience of homelessness, helped guide study decisions and interpretations of findings.

RESULTS

Study recruitment was supposed to occur over 6 months starting in January 2021 but was extended due to delays in recruitment. These delays included COVID-19 delays (eg, recruitment sites shut down due to outbreaks and study team members testing positive) and delays that may have been indirectly related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including high staff turnover or recruitment sites having competing priorities. In end-July 2022, in total, 641 people experiencing homelessness had been referred from 26 partnering recruitment sites, and 563 people experiencing homelessness had enrolled in the study and completed a baseline demographic survey. Of the 563 participants in the study, 452 had recently moved into the housing when they enrolled, with 272 placed in PB-PSH and 180 placed in SS-PSH. Another 111 participants were approved but are still waiting for housing placement. To date, 49 participants have been lost to follow-up, and 12% of phones (70 of the initial 563 distributed) were reported lost by participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Recruitment during the pandemic, while successful, was challenging given that in-person contact was not permitted at times either by program sites or the research institutions during COVID-19 surges and high community transmission, which particularly affected homelessness programs in Los Angeles County. To overcome recruitment challenges, flexible strategies were used, which included extending the recruitment period and the distribution of cell phones with paid data plans. Given current recruitment numbers and retention rates that are over 90%, the study will be able to address a gap in the literature by considering the comparative effectiveness of PB-PSH versus SS-PSH on patient-centered quality of life, health care use, and health behaviors that reduce COVID-19 risk, which can influence future public health approaches to homelessness and infectious diseases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04769349; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04769349.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/46782.

Primary care embedded within permanent supportive housing for people who use substances: A qualitative study examining healthcare access in Vancouver, Canada

Marginally housed people who use drugs and alcohol (PWUD/A) face barriers in accessing healthcare services, which may be improved by providing healthcare in housing settings. This case study examines the experiences of healthcare access amongst PWUD/A who live in a permanent supportive housing model in Vancouver, Canada. This model has an embedded multidisciplinary clinic providing in-reach services. Thirty participants were recruited via posters placed throughout the building and semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted remotely. Interviews were conducted with participants who accessed onsite care regularly (n = 15) and those who do not (n = 15). Data were analysed to identify both a priori and emerging themes. Participants who accessed the onsite clinic reported benefiting from stigma-free care. Close proximity and convenience of drop-in appointments enabled participants to engage with healthcare services more consistently, though hours of operation and privacy concerns were barriers for others. Participants who did not use the onsite clinic highlighted the importance of continuity of care with their pre-existing primary care team, particularly if their clinic was in close geographic proximity. However, they also described utilising these services for urgent health needs or as an occasional alternative source of care. Shared perspectives across all participants emphasised the importance of low-barrier services, including medication delivery, convenience and positive therapeutic relationships. Our findings suggest that embedding access to primary care within supportive housing benefits PWUD/A who have previously encountered barriers to healthcare access. This model could be implemented to prevent utilisation of acute healthcare resources and improve health outcomes amongst PWUD/A.

Health Care Needs of Young Adults Who Have Experienced Homelessness

INTRODUCTION

Young adults experiencing homelessness have poorer overall health compared with the general population. However, not much is known about how health care needs may change in the transition from homelessness to supportive housing. This study utilizes the Gelberg-Andersen Behavioral Model for Vulnerable Populations to examine unmet health care needs among young adults currently experiencing homelessness and formerly homeless young adults living in supportive housing.

METHODS

This study includes data from 192 young adults who were either residing in a supportive housing program (n=103) or were "unhoused" (eg, residing on the street, staying in emergency shelters; n=89) in Los Angeles, CA, between 2017 and 2019. Hierarchical modeling examined unmet health care needs and factors that may enable those needs to be met, controlling for predisposing and other need factors.

RESULTS

Controlling for predisposing and other need characteristics, this study identified increased enabling factors among those residing in supportive housing, the most widely applied intervention for homelessness. Participants who resided in supportive housing were more likely to report at least 1 type of unmet need than youth who did not have access to housing. Additional findings regarding the association of enabling factors and unmet need yield mixed results based on the type of unmet need.

DISCUSSION

The acknowledgment of unmet needs may, in fact, be a byproduct of shifting priorities, which often occurs in the transition from homelessness to housing. Understanding the unmet need and health implications of this transition has relevance for practice as we work to better support formerly homeless young adults in meeting the needs that they identify.

Service utilisation changes in the transition to permanent supportive housing: The role of the housing environment and case management

This study examines whether routine, low-cost service use changes in the transition from homelessness to permanent supportive housing (PSH) and explores whether housing model, neighbourhood and level of case management engagement affect utilisation of routine services. Data come from a prospective longitudinal study of adults experiencing homelessness who entered PSH in Los Angeles between 2014 and 2016 and participated in four interviews: pre-housing (i.e., while experiencing homelessness), and 3, 6 and 12 months after move-in. Mixed effects logistic regression assessed the effects of demographics, case management, housing model and neighbourhood location on service utilisation at each time point across five domains: basic needs, financial, educational, mental health and physical health. Longitudinal unmet need for services and onsite service use contextualised findings. Service utilisation significantly decreased at each time point in the domains of basic needs, financial and mental health. Neighbourhood was significantly associated with basic needs and mental health service use, while housing model was associated with financial service utilisation. Case management was associated with all service use outcomes with all relationships demonstrating more case management visits was associated with greater odds of routine service utilisation. Unmet service needs were consistent over time. Onsite service utilisation was low across all residents. Results indicate that routine service use declines with length of tenancy while unmet need for services remain prevalent. Case management appears to be critical in facilitating routine service use, while the housing environment should be considered to ensure residents have accessible and proximal routine care.

Delivering collaborative mental health care within supportive housing: implementation evaluation of a community-hospital partnership

BACKGROUND

Approaches to address unmet mental health care needs in supportive housing settings are needed. Collaborative approaches to delivering psychiatric care have robust evidence in multiple settings, however such approaches have not been adequately studied in housing settings. This study evaluates the implementation of a shifted outpatient collaborative care initiative in which a psychiatrist was added to existing housing, community mental health, and primary care supports in a women-centered supportive housing complex in Toronto, Canada.

METHODS

The initiative was designed and implemented by stakeholders from an academic hospital and from community housing and mental health agencies. Program activities comprised multidisciplinary support for tenants (e.g. multidisciplinary care teams, case conferences), tenant engagement (psychoeducation sessions), and staff capacity-building (e.g. formal trainings, informal ad hoc questions). This mixed methods implementation evaluation sought to understand (1) program activity delivery including satisfaction with these activities, (2) consistency with team-based tenant-centered care and with pre-specified shared lenses (trauma-informed, culturally safe, harm reduction), and (3) facilitators and barriers to implementation over a one-year period. Quantitative data included reporting of program activity delivery (weekly and monthly), staff surveys, and tenant surveys (post-group surveys following tenant psychoeducation groups and an all-tenant survey). Qualitative data included focus groups with staff and stakeholders, program documents, and free-text survey responses.

RESULTS

All three program activity domains (multidisciplinary supports, tenant engagement, staff capacity-building) were successfully implemented. Main program activities were multidisciplinary case conferences, direct psychiatric consultation, tenant psychoeducation sessions, formal staff training, and informal staff support. Psychoeducation for tenants and informal/formal staff support were particularly valued. Most activities were team-based. Of the shared lenses, trauma-informed care was the most consistently implemented. Facilitators to implementation were shared lenses, psychiatrist characteristics, shared time/space, balance between structure and flexibility, building trust, logistical support, and the embedded evaluation. Barriers were that the initial model was driven by leadership, confusion in initial processes, different workflows across organizations, and staff turnover; where possible, iterative changes were implemented to address barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

This evaluation highlights the process of successfully implementing a shifted outpatient collaborative mental health care initiative in supportive housing. Further work is warranted to evaluate whether collaborative care adaptations in supportive housing settings lead to improvements in tenant- and program-level outcomes.

Perceived care coordination among permanent supportive housing participants: Evidence from a managed care plan in the United States

Homelessness is a pervasive public health problem in the United States (U.S.). Under the U.S. Affordable Care Act, the nation's public health insurance program (Medicaid) was expanded to serve more individuals, including those experiencing homelessness. Coupled with changes in financial incentives designed to reduce healthcare costs, health plans, hospitals and large health systems have started to operate permanent supportive housing (PSH) programmes as a healthcare benefit. To better understand patient perceptions of care coordination in a PSH programme operated by a large health plan in Southern California, we conducted 22 semi-structured in-depth patient interviews between October and November 2019. Two coders analysed these data inductively and deductively, using pre-identified domains and open coding. Coding reliability and thematic saturation were also assessed. Findings indicated positive experiences with care coordination for physical health and social supports, such as food distribution and transportation. Identified service gaps included mental health support and help securing public assistance (e.g., cash benefits). Opportunities to enhance PSH care coordination were also identified, such as the need for a simplified approach. Hospitals, health plans and systems considering PSH programmes may look to these results for implementation guidance.

The comparative effectiveness of different models of permanent supportive housing on problematic substance use, depression, and anxiety symptoms over time

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness of different models of permanent supportive housing (PSH), housing configuration, and service provision model on substance use, depression, and anxiety symptoms among residents over time.

METHODS

Linear mixed model regression was used with 888 residents of PSH to investigate the relationship between supportive housing type, service model, and housing configuration and change in mental health and substance use at baseline, 6-, 12-, and 18-month follow-up.

RESULTS

There were few significant differences in problematic substance use, depression, or anxiety symptoms among those in different PSH types, different housing configuration models, or different service provision models. Similarly, there were no significant differences in PSH type, housing configuration, or service delivery model among those with severe mental illness (SMI), substance use disorder (SUD), or those with dual diagnoses.

CONCLUSIONS

There is little evidence that different models of PSH result in differences in mental health and substance use outcomes. Future research should consider the number of services clients receive and critical periods in PSH residency in improving mental health and substance use outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Evaluation of an interprofessional care coordination model: Benefits to health professions students and the community served

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

An innovative care coordination program was developed to enhance wellness among low-income older adults living in subsidized apartment buildings and to provide rich interprofessional education experiences for health professions students.

METHODS

Program effectiveness for the residents was measured through an evaluation of participation, services used, and healthcare utilization. Educational effectiveness was measured through a change in health concepts and perceptions of interprofessional practice.

FINDINGS

Health care utilization among participating residents showed an 8.6% reduction in emergency department visits and 9.8% reduction in hospital admissions. Students demonstrated improved knowledge in motivational interviewing (p = .02); diabetes (p = .02); hypertension (p≤.01); and frailty (p≤.01). Changes in students perception of interprofessional practice were significant in two areas; Teamwork and Collaboration (p≥.00); and Person Centeredness (p = .00).

DISCUSSION

This care coordination model may be an effective approach to reduce care resource utilization among medically complex lower income older adults and provides a rich interprofessional learning experience for students.

Placement of chronically homeless into different types of permanent supportive housing before and after a coordinated entry system: The influence of severe mental illness, substance use disorder, and dual diagnosis on housing configuration and intensity of services

AIMS

Permanent supportive housing (PSH) is designed to house people who experience chronic homelessness with one or more of the following: serious mental illness (SMI), substance use disorders (SUD) or human immunodeficiency virus. The Department of Housing and Urban Development has required major metropolitan areas to develop a coordinated entry system (CES) to prioritize access to PSH to those who need it the most. The aim of this paper is to determine whether PSH residents with SMI, SUD, or dual diagnosis were more likely to be housed after implementation of CES and were more likely to be housed in housing models with more intensive services provided.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey with 855 residents of different PSH models.

RESULTS

Those with SMI, SUD, or dual diagnosis were not more likely to be housed using the CES but were more likely to be housed in higher intensity service programs.

CONCLUSIONS

Those with SMI are more likely to be housed in PSH with high-intensity services.

Assessing the relationship between housing and health among medically complex, chronically homeless individuals experiencing frequent hospital use in the United States

In the United States and abroad, health systems have begun to address housing insecurity through programs that adhere to the Housing First model. The model provides permanent supportive housing without disqualification due to current mental health problems or substance use, along with optional case management services. This study used qualitative methods to explore how housing stability affected chronic disease management and social and community relationships among individuals with complex health and social needs and patterns of high hospital utilisation who were housed as part of a scattered-site Housing First program in a mid-size city in the northeastern United States. 26 individual, semi-structured interviews were conducted with Housing First clients in their homes or day program sites between March and July 2017. Interviews were digitally recorded and transcripts were analysed using a qualitative descriptive methodology until thematic saturation was reached. Findings suggest that housing provided the physical location to manage the logistical aspects of care for these clients, and an environment where they were better able to focus on their health and wellness. Study participants reported less frequent use of emergency services and more regular interaction with primary care providers. Additionally, case managers' role in connecting clients to behavioural health services removed barriers to care that clients had previously faced. Housing also facilitated reconnection with family and friends whose relationships with participants had become strained or distant. Changes to physical and social communities sometimes resulted in experiences of stigmatisation and exclusion, especially for clients who moved to areas with less racial and socioeconomic diversity, but participation in the program promoted an increased sense of safety and security for many clients.

Evidence for an integrated healthcare and psychosocial multidisciplinary model to address rough sleeping

People who sleep rough/experience unsheltered homelessness face barriers accessing mainstream healthcare and psychosocial services. The barriers to service access exacerbate poor health, which in turn create additional challenges for rough sleepers to access health and psychosocial services, including stable housing. The study presents descriptive statistics to identify housing outcomes of people working with a Multidisciplinary Model that comprises integrated healthcare and psychosocial support, and qualitative data with clients and service providers to investigate how the Model is experienced and delivered in practice. Fieldwork was conducted between December 2016 and March 2018 with the Multidisciplinary Team operating in Cairns, in the far north of Australia. Qualitative data are drawn from in-depth interviews with 26 rough sleepers and 33 health and psychosocial service providers from the Multidisciplinary Team and the wider service system. Descriptive statistics show that 67% of clients who were sleeping rough were supported to immediately access stable housing, and at the end of the program, all clients remained housed. The qualitative findings illustrated how integrated healthcare and psychosocial outreach enabled people sleeping rough to overcome barriers they experienced accessing mainstream healthcare and other services. With the benefit of healthcare, people felt sufficiently well to engage with the psychosocial service providers to have their housing and other psychosocial needs addressed. This article demonstrates how individual responsibility for and control over healthcare is not only a matter of the individual, but also a matter requiring systems change and the active provision of resources to cater for the constraints and opportunities present in people's immediate environments.

Mental health, substance use and HIV risk behaviors among HIV-positive adults who experienced homelessness in the United States - Medical Monitoring Project, 2009-2015

Homelessness is a challenge to retention in HIV care and adherence to antiretroviral therapy. We describe the sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics of HIV-positive adults who reported recent homelessness. The Medical Monitoring Project is a complex sample survey of HIV-positive adults receiving medical care in the United States. We used weighted interview and medical record data collected from June 2009 to May 2015 to estimate the prevalence of depression, substance use, and HIV risk behaviors among adults experiencing recent homelessness. From 2009 to 2015, 8.3% of HIV-positive adults experienced recent homelessness. Homeless adults were more likely than housed adults to have major depression, to binge drink, use non-injection drugs, use injection drugs, and smoke. Over 60% of homeless adults were sexually active during the past year, with homeless adults reporting more condomless sex with an HIV-negative or unknown status sex partner than housed adults. Programs attempting to improve the health outcomes of HIV-positive homeless persons and reduce ongoing HIV transmission can focus on providing basic needs, such as housing, and ancillary services, such as mental health counseling or substance abuse treatment and counseling.

Veterans' assignment to single-site versus scattered-site permanent supportive housing

To address homelessness among Veterans, a growing proportion of permanent supportive housing units supported by the U.S. Departments of Housing and Urban Development and Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) program are allocated to programs where multiple Veterans with a history of homelessness live in a particular building, referred to as single-site housing. This mixed-methods study-including administrative data from Veterans who moved into HUD-VASH housing and qualitative data from focus groups with services providers at 10 single-site programs-describes the characteristics and needs of Veterans who moved into single-site HUD-VASH programs, the rationale for developing single-site HUD-VASH programs, and the services provided in single-site programs that are responsive to Veterans' needs. Based on quantitative analyses, Veterans who were older and had chronic medical and mental health conditions and sought related care were at increased odds of receiving single-site housing. Qualitatively, we found that HUD-VASH programs developed single-site programs for two reasons: to ensure that the most vulnerable Veterans remained housed through the provision of supportive services and to increase housing options for hard-to-house Veterans, including those who require more support because of medical, mental health, or substance use disorders; physical disabilities; or lack of ability to live independently for other reasons. Due to the high needs of Veterans served by single-site programs, development of these programs should consider both space and staffing needs. Future research should assess the relationship between assignment to housing type and health and housing outcomes for participants as well as service enhancements to address Veterans' needs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Understanding Risk Environments in Permanent Supportive Housing for Formerly Homeless Adults

In this study, we used ethnographic methods and a risk environment framework to consider how contextual factors produce or reduce risk for substance use with a sample of 27 adults who recently moved into permanent supportive housing (PSH). Most apparent was how the social and physical environments interacted, because most participants focused on how having an apartment had dramatically changed their lives and how they interact with others. Specific themes that emerged that also involved economic and policy environments included the following: isolation versus social engagement; becoming one's own caseworker; and engaging in identity work. This study underscores the scarcity yet importance of research that examines the multiple types of environment in which PSH is situated, and suggests that a better understanding of how these environments interact to produce or reduce risk is needed to develop optimal interventions and support services.

Life Goals Over Time Among Homeless Adults in Permanent Supportive Housing

Permanent supportive housing (PSH) is a widely-accepted solution to the challenge of chronic homelessness. While housing support and retention, physical health, and healthcare continue to be important for formerly homeless persons in PSH, "higher-order" and humanistic needs such as thriving have received less attention and as a result are less well understood in this population. One important indicator of thriving is the ability to establish and articulate life goals. This study utilizes longitudinal data from 421 formerly homeless adults prior to their move into PSH, and at 3-, 6- and 12-months after move-in (369 respondents completed all four interviews), to examine what life goals are articulated by this population and how those goals change over time. Prior to housing, most respondents articulated housing attainment as their primary life goal, whereas at follow-up interviews health goals, housing relocation, and financial goals became more prevalent. Aspirational goals (e.g., independence, self-improvement, artistic pursuits) were also common, but demonstrated a decrease over time in housing. Relationship goals remained common and consistent over time. Findings indicate that housing is a necessary, but perhaps not sufficient, step for improving thriving among formerly homeless adults. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.