ArticlePDF Available

Housing First: The Pathways Model to End Homelessness for People with Mental Illness and Addiction Manual

Authors:

Abstract

This step-by-step manual provides a solid foundation for introducing the evidence-based Housing First approach--provide housing first, followed by supportive treatment services--into new locations, and evolving existing programs into those based on the ideals of the Pathways Model to End Homelessness. It guides you in structuring policies and programs that respect and respond to the voices of men, women, and families in your community, and provides easy-to-follow tools and tips for implementation.
235
Part G _ Reviews
Sam Tsemberis (2010)
Housing First: The Pathways Model to End
Homelessness for People with Mental Illness
and Addiction Manual
Minnesota: Hazelden, 244 pp. appr. 50
Housing First is the most discussed method in Europe in terms of combatting
homelessness. Within a relatively short period of time the concept has been widely
disseminated, but what is the Housing First model, exactly? A lot of questions have
been raised in recent years: what components and elements must be included in
this model? Who is the target group? Is Housing First a slogan, a philosophy, a
programme, a brand – or a policy? Many have looked forward to reading this book.
Homelessness is a widespread social problem, and the struggle is ongoing
throughout Europe to combat the problem. Conditions in various countries differ
widely, but many actors have realized that a new approach is necessary. In
Sweden, for example, an individual perspective dominated for a long time, and
homelessness has been mainly analysed and explained with reference to indi-
vidual factors such as substance abuse and dependence, mental disabilities or
other social problems; if these problems disappear then it should also be possible
to solve the problem of homelessness. Gradually, however, this explanation has
changed. To a large extent, a multifactorial explanatory model has been adopted
in its place, where structural factors like the structure of the housing market are
of vital importance. Other structural factors are exclusion from the housing
market, unemployment and discrimination. One of the fundamental ideas of the
Housing First model is to separate treatment from housing. This renders the
structural and individual factors visible, and it becomes clear that homelessness
is much more than just an individual problem.
The interest in evidence-based practice (EBP) has grown in our part of Europe. The
search for effective, well-researched methods is ongoing, and a method that has
proven to be efficient in randomized trials is difficult to dismiss; the Pathways
Housing First (PHF) programme is one such method, with well-established efficacy
in reducing homelessness for a particular group of individuals.
ISSN 2030-2762 / ISSN 2030- 3106 online
236 European Journal of Homelessness _ Volume 5, No. 2, Decembe r 2011
The author of this book, Sam Tsemberis, created the Pathways Housing First
model, which subsequently partly inspired the Housing First movement. Dr.
Tsemberis is Greek-born and holds a Ph.D. in clinical psychology. From his Greek
background he inherited certain values, including the belief that housing is a funda-
mental right for all people, including people with mental illness.. Tsemberis is based
in the Department of Psychiatry in Colombia University Medical Center, and is also
the lead trainer and consultant for the Pathways Housing First Training Institute.
Primarily, the book is to be characterized as a kind of manual; the first part
contains an introduction followed by eight chapters, while in the second part, the
Pathways Housing First Training Institute is introduced. The book also contains a
number of appendices.
One question often raised when discussing how to help homeless individuals is:
can people with both substance abuse and mental illness manage to live in their
own apartments, even with tailored support? Is it really possible? It required a lot
of courage to introduce this programme before research had proved its effective-
ness, and research has been crucial for the development of PHF as an evidence-
based programme. The book’s introduction describes the history of the programme
and the ideas on which PHF is based; each of the book’s chapters is then intro-
duced briefly so the reader knows what to expect, and at the end of this introduc-
tion a list of particularly relevant terms is provided.
Chapter 1 introduces the Pathways Housing First programme on recovery-oriented
service and its philosophical assumptions. Why does it work? By providing a home
for a person, the programme offers dignity and hope. For many clients, the result
is the beginning of a process of change. PHF offers an alternative to the previously
most common model used in the U.S and Europe – Continuum of Care (CC) or
Linear Residential Treatment (LRT). Within this model, the client gradually improves
their living situation; the steps or actions often begin through contact with an
outreach team, followed by stays in various types of shelter or transitional housing;
the last step is into permanent accommodation. ‘Gaining’ permanent housing is
frequently associated with meeting conditions such as participation in treatment
and demonstrating sobriety. For a client with a psychiatric disorder and substance
abuse dependence, the path to housing is often not straightforward; many fail and
fall into homelessness again. In the Continuum of Care the terms ‘treatment
resistant’ or ‘hard to house’ are used.
PHF started as an alternative to this model, finding that housing is fundamental to
survival and to meeting the basic human needs of refuge and safety. The principles
of Housing First are: housing as a basic human right; respect, warmth and compas-
sion for all clients; a commitment to work with clients as long as they need it;
scatted-site housing; independent apartments; the separation of housing and
237
Part G _ Reviews
services; consumer choice and self-determination; a recovery orientation; and
harm reduction. The emphasis is on values and the attitudes towards clients.
Chapter 1 goes on to describe these principles in detail.
Chapter 2 covers the initial steps involved in PHF. The target group and require-
ments for joining the programme are described; the client must be long-term
homeless, have a severe mental illness, and show interest in taking part in the
programme – maybe not initially but over time. The client must also fulfil two core
requirements: first, payment of rent – thirty percent of the “monthly income”
should go to rent; and secondly, weekly visits by PHF team member. The chapter
points out that engagement is one of the most important phases of the PHF
programme and first impressions of the programme are very important. Four
principles are emphasized as being behind the success of the programme:
accepting the client’s priority for housing; providing a flexible service; removing
obstacles whenever possible; and taking responsibility for follow-up. While the
general philosophy in working with homeless people is to tell the clients what they
need to do, PHF, in contrast, involves continually asking: “How can I help?”, and
then listening to the answer.
Chapter 3 is about housing and housing support services. The desire for a regular
dwelling is at the top of almost all clients’ priority lists. Approximately 95% have a
preference for a private apartment within the community. This chapter explains
what might be involved in the process of finding the right apartment for the client.
One client said: “I walked around for years without a single key: a key to a car, a key
to a house, a key to anything… I do not think people understand what a key typifies.
It is something that belongs to you. It is something huge” (p.57). Various aspects of
housing are described in the chapter. Difficulties like loneliness are discussed, as
well as questions about having pets. The importance of relationships with landlords
is highlighted, and many practical issues such us handling keys and plumbing
problems are raised. Challenges like health and safety issues, and relationships
with family and children are also discussed briefly, as well as what happens when
clients fail; team members understand that relapses are part of mental illness and
addiction, and sometimes relocation is necessary. The home visit is described in
this chapter as serving many purposes that fall into two areas: housing related
issues and human clinical issues. Home visits provide an opportunity for staff to
get an idea of, and observe the kind of assistance the client requires to maintain
their apartment in the best way. The following is an insightful quote from a staff
member in this regard: “The home visit is the heart and soul of the work we do,
because I think that’s ultimately where you want the change to happen, you know,
in the person’s environment” (p.48).
238 European Journal of Homelessness _ Volume 5, No. 2, Decembe r 2011
Chapter 4 describes the two types of teams that provide treatment and support
services within the Pathways Housing First model. By using the Assertive
Community Treatment (ACT) and the Intensive Case Management (ICM), the same
staff can conduct outreach and provide support for clients living on the street,
assist them in finding and moving into apartments, and then continue to provide
treatment and support until the client graduates from the programme. The ACT
serves people with severe psychiatric disabilities and the ICM serves people with
more moderate disabilities. One of the main challenges is to recruit and train staff
members, and to ensure that they share the human and social justice values on
which the programme is based. In this chapter, information is provided about
practical tools that can be used in daily work, such as the WRAP (Wellness Recover y
Action Plan), which is based on the client’s strength, needs, interests and goals.
Chapters 5 and 6 are about the two models (ACT) and (ICM) used in the context of
the PHF model. These chapters are a detailed manual and explanation of how the
models can best be used in the PHF framework.
Chapter 7 briefly describes a number of evidence-based practice and clinical
interventions. In order to be able to offer the clients the necessary support, other
methods and models than the ACT and the ICM may be used. All of the models
mentioned are based on the same client-driven and human values principles that
are fundamental to the PHF programme. Harm reduction is an important component
of the PHF programme, where the aim is to reduce the negative effects of abuse
and dependence; “The goal in harm reduction is to help the client live a better life,
but is not a permanent solution. Harm reduction is about observing and celebrating
small positive steps and it requires an individualized approach.” Engagement in
treatment is the primary goal of PHF, but staff members do not insist on treatment,
nor do they challenge a client’s point of view. Most PHF clients have dual problems
with mental illness and substance abuse. Integrated dual disorders treatment
(IDDT) is described as the most effective approach to addressing these problems,
while two other well known models are also mentioned in this chapter: the Stages
of Change, and Motivational Interviewing (MI). Chapter 8 is about how to adapt the
PHF programme to ‘your’ community.
The Housing First model has been highlighted as a big success, but it has also been
questioned and criticized. The main issue has been: what is Housing First? The
extremely positive outcomes demonstrated in randomized studies raise questions:
does this positive effect apply to all Housing First programmes? Which compo-
nents or elements should be included in order to achieve such good results? What
groups should be targeted? These questions are not all answered in this book; the
book obviously only deals with the Pathways Housing First programme, and it is
239
Part G _ Reviews
clear that the target group for the programme is long-term homeless people with
severe mental illness and addiction problems. The book is neither a research report
nor a book on theory, but a manual for a specific programme in the U.S.
In the EU there is an ambition to broaden the term Housing First. The final report
from the European Consensus Conference on Homelessness 2010 suggested the
term ‘Housing Led’, to describe all policy approaches that identify the provision of
stable housing with security of tenure as the initial step in solving homelessness.
“How can I help?” is the main question in the book. Suddenly the perspective is
changed; the client is the expert and the staff assists him/her to achieve the goals.
The programme Pathways Housing First must adapt to the client’s needs and not
the other way round, where the client is supposed to fit into the programme. “How
can I help?” The question is asked again and again. Its strength is in this sentence,
and this particular feeling permeates the entire book; it arouses a desire to partici-
pate in a process of change and provides an excellent description of how such work
can be carried out.
The Housing First programme has sometimes been criticized for being a Housing
Only solution, in that housing will be offered without the individualized support that
is necessary and that also requires a lot of resources. The book shows that tailored
support is crucial for success in the Pathways Housing First programme. Above all,
it is the client’s objectives that guide the entire programme. PHF is impressively
structured and systematized with a number of tools. There is a variety of methods
and programmes mentioned, as well as practical guidelines and checklists on how
the planning can be done with the client in a structured way, and how objectives
are then followed up. However, the most radical aspect of the approach is, as
previously mentioned, that the client’s perspective is the fundamental value that
influences every measure taken. The discussion in the book about ‘failures’ is a
good illustration of these values. It is a fact that clients sometimes relapse and that
relocations are necessary; up to 30% of clients move from their first home, and a
number move two or three times. In these cases, it is vital to have a non-judgmental
attitude and to realize that those who suffer most are the clients; it is essential to
ask continually: “How can I help?”
The fact that this book is written in the U.S. influences its approach. In European
countries, a more moderate mode of expression is generally used, and words like
‘success’ may be considered shallow. However, the book is refreshingly positive.
Anyone who expected a book on theory or a research study might be disappointed;
the analysis has already been done, and the Housing First model is the only solution
to end homelessness. Will this book really make a difference in the fight against
homelessness? Yes; adapted to the situation in different countries it can be an
important source of knowledge and inspiration. Research, evaluation and follow-up
240 European Journal of Homelessness _ Volume 5, No. 2, December 2011
are needed in the European context; a variety of measures are required for different
target groups, and knowledge has to be increased with regard to those differences.
This book is, however, of undoubted use for many categories of staff and researchers
because the necessary components of PHF are well-described. The book can also
play an important role in changing attitudes towards homeless people and the
homelessness problem in general. The biggest challenge for European countries
is to achieve a real change of perspective and to adopt the conviction that ending
homelessness is possible.
Annika Remaeus and Ann Jönsson
Programme Officers,
The National Board of Health and Welfare, Stockholm, Sweden.
... As a program model, HF is commonly associated with the 'Pathways to Housing' program pioneered by psychologist Sam Tsemberis in 1992 (Tsemberis & Eisenberg, 2000). Described as a 'complex clinical and housing intervention' (Padgett et al., 2016, p. 3), it entailed the immediate provision of permanent housing paired with access to specialist clinical and social supports provided on a voluntary, individualised, and consumer-led basis (Tsemberis, 2010). It emerged as an alternative to the 'Treatment First' or 'Staircase' approach which required participants to abstain from drugs and alcohol and adhere to treatment programs before transitioning to independent housing (Padgett et al., 2016). ...
... 'Consumer choice' is a key tenet of the HF philosophy, as is the idea that access to housing should not be conditional upon abstinence of drugs and alcohol or engagement with treatment services (Padgett et al., 2016). These principles are operationalised programmatically in HF practices such as utilising private rental properties to afford clients choice over where they live, and by making use of the specialist treatment and support components of HF voluntary rather than a condition of program engagement (Tsemberis, 2010). ...
Article
While there are an abundance of studies evaluating the effectiveness of Housing First programs, there is a recent surge in critical social science research that situates Housing First within broader debates about contemporary neoliberal homelessness governance. This paper provides clarity to this evolving and somewhat fragmented work by highlighting three main conceptualisations of critical Housing First research. First, it is interpreted as a technocratic global fast policy that, while appealing to policymakers and government officials, ultimately fails to address the structural causes of housing insecurity and homelessness. Second, it is viewed as an economic tool that prioritises housing for a narrow cohort of ‘chronic homeless’ that incur a high cost to scarce public resources. Third, it is seen as a disciplinary tactic that ignores people’s alternative expressions of home and compels them to abide by the norms of ‘independent living’ and the private rental market. We conclude with an assessment of this critical literature. Whilst acknowledging its key insights, we contend that its treatment of Housing First as yet another form of neoliberal homelessness governance and overreliance on Anglophone-country case studies risks reifying HF’s worst aspects and failing to adequately recognise its transformative potential.
... Housing First Approach: Housing First has been widely acclaimed for its effectiveness in ending homelessness by focusing on housing as the first stage and not insisting on the people change their behavior or go through treatment before they are given a place to live. This approach has proved to enhance housing stability and the general welfare of CH individuals since it offers direct access to permanent housing accompanied by case management and healthcare services (Tsemberis, 2010). ...
... A comparison of the interventions established that Housing First methods were superior to the conventional shelter-based ones. The Housing First model which does not compel the clients to undergo treatment, attend AA meetings, or abstain from substances before they can be housed has been seen to produce better results concerning housing stability (Tsemberis, 2010). This is backed by elaborate case management that involves the provision of other services that are unique to the needs of the targeted homeless persons; thus, dealing with the complex problems that affect the targeted group (Henwood et al., 2015). ...
Article
Full-text available
Homelessness persists as a social problem that affects the populace due to economic fluctuations, housing accessibility, and discrimination. This paper aims to discuss the role of social support systems for the homeless with a focus on interventions and their results. The paper uses questionnaires, interviews, and case studies to analyze the demographic characteristics of the homeless population, the reasons for homelessness, and the effectiveness of current interventions. Research shows that economic fluctuation is the leading cause, further worsened by issues in housing costs and racism. The comparative evaluation also shows that Housing First interventions are more effective in providing lasting housing for homeless people than the shelter-first model. While there were improvements in the areas of providing shelters and healthcare, there are still issues regarding the lack of proper linkages between services and lack of adequate employment that continue to trap people into homelessness. Policy implications suggest that more funding should be allocated to affordable housing, higher levels of support services, and better collaboration between agencies to address these issues. In this way, the identified problems can be solved more effectively, and the necessary interventions can be made for the improvement of the situation with homeless people.
... Así mismo, el uso de vivienda Housing First, aunque escaso, prioriza la provisión de vivienda estable como primer paso para abordar otras necesidades Stergiopoulos et al., 2014;Tsemberis, 2010). ...
... otras necesidadesStergiopoulos et al., 2014;Tsemberis, 2010). Asimis- ...
Article
Full-text available
El aumento de personas sin hogar ha generado una creciente preocupación por mejorar su atención. Cualquier iniciativa debe construirse desde un diagnóstico participativo, en colaboración con redes ya existentes con experiencia en la atención al sinhogarismo y basarse en sus necesidades reales, informadas por las personas sin hogar y el personal técnico que trabaja con ellas. Desde este enfoque, el proyecto "cordobasinhogar" pretende transformar el acceso a la información sobre recursos para personas sin hogar en un entorno digital, con especial atención al sinhogarismo femenino. Surge de una Investigación-Acción Participativa y se desarrolló tras explorar cómo las personas sin hogar en Córdoba, España, valoran y utilizan los recursos disponibles y cómo es su acceso a la ciudadanía digital. Cordobasinhogar.es ofrece un sitio web con información geolocalizada sobre las necesidades de las personas en situación de sinhogarismo. En colaboración con el Ayuntamiento de Córdoba, se realizaron entrevistas estructuradas a 215 personas adultas (23,3% mujeres). Los datos rompen con el estereotipo más común asociado a las personas sin hogar, que carecen de acceso a las TIC y revelan el uso de los recursos sociales más utilizados con diferencias según el género y la tipología ETHOS. El uso de dispositivos móviles y acceso a Internet son comunes para escuchar música, usar WhatsApp, consultar YouTube, redes sociales, noticias, búsqueda de empleo y temas de vivienda, recursos sociales y salud, entre otras. Este estudio destaca la importancia de involucrar a la comunidad en la mejora de la atención a personas sin hogar y muestra cómo la tecnología digital puede contribuir a estar "conectados", proporcionando información de fácil acceso sobre los recursos disponibles.
... Zemlje u kojima se Stanovanje prvo intervencije i programi provode, imaju različite socio-ekonomske kontekste, strukturu i mehanizme socijalne zaštite, stambenu infrastrukturu te rizike od beskućništva. Stoga su i programi različiti i u manjoj ili većoj mjeri odstupaju od izvornog modela, razvijenog u New Yorku (Tsemberis, 2010.). Nekoliko je kriterija koji intervenciju čini usklađenom s vrijednostima i temeljnim pretpostavkama na kojima se temelji pristup Stanovanje prvo (Pleace i Bretherton, 2013.; Pleace, 2016.). ...
Article
Housing First is one of the best-researched and documented approaches to ending homelessness, grounded in the human right to adequate housing. It is precisely because of this foundation and numerous evidence of effectiveness that Housing First is supported by international and European policies on human rights and the fight against poverty. This paper presents key evidence in support of the effectiveness of this approach related to the outcomes of exit from homelessness and housing stability, improvement of mental health, quality of life and cost-effectiveness of interventions. The available research provides convincing evidence of the advantages of the Housing First approach compared to traditional approaches in terms of the effectiveness of exiting homelessness and the stability of housing, as well as the improvement of the quality of life, assessed by various parameters. Regarding the improvement of mental health and the cost-effectiveness of interventions, the results are mixed. Key words: homelessness; Housing first; human right to adequate housing; mental health; quality of life; cost-effectiveness of interventions; fight against homelessness i social exclusion
... Alongside this critical movement against the conditional logic of welfare, interesting new rights-based initiatives in the homelessness sector are emerging such as the 'Housing First'-model. By prioritising stable housing for those in need without too many requirements, this approach goes beyond temporary shelter and eschews the conditional logic (Padgett, Henwood, & Tsemberis, 2016;Tsemberis, 2011). ...
Thesis
Full-text available
The main purpose of this thesis is to gain a better understanding of access to social rights for people experiencing homelessness (PEH). In many welfare states, the principle of 'no address, no rights' persists, making social rights contingent on having a registered address. This creates a 'Postal Paradox' (Byrne, 2018) where the absence of an address restricts access to rights, perpetuating homelessness. Several European countries have introduced alternative registration systems for address-less persons, and there is growing recognition of the 'right to an effective postal address' for PEH , as formulated in the Homeless Bill of Rights by FEANTSA and the Housing Rights Watch (2017). The thesis primarily investigates the reference address at a Public Centre for Social Welfare (PCSW) in Belgium, by using quantitative and qualitative research methods. The analysis of an integrated administrative dataset reveals the severe complexity of chronic homelessness, and show significant challenges in the importance of making visible those who are 'administratively invisible'. The qualitative analysis made use of different perspectives to examine address-lessness, both from a non-take-up and administrative burdens perspective. Findings reveal a disconnect between policy design and implementation, impacting a vulnerable population group. Despite its intention to include the most excluded, the policy's implementation is hindered by conditionality, administrative burdens, and conflicting goals. This inconsistency results in exclusion of non-compliant individuals, leading to severe repercussions such as a loss of access to fundamental rights and further administrative and social exclusion.
... Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023). The seminal Pathways HF model emerged in the early 1990s emphasizing housing as a right by providing rent subsidies to people with experiences of serious mental illness and chronic homelessness to access independent apartments and intensive, individualized supports, with minimal preconditions (Tsemberis, 2010). Subsequent research demonstrated significant housing outcomes for a great majority of tenants (Padgett et al., 2006;Tsemberis et al., 2004;Tsemberis & Eisenberg, 2000), leading Pathways HF programs to be replicated internationally. ...
Thesis
Full-text available
Background. Housing First (HF) provides rent supplements and supports to help homeless individuals with mental illness obtain stable housing. A 2015 literature review reported that HF was associated with cost offsets, however, they tended to be less than the cost of the intervention. Since then, additional studies, including the finalized cost-effectiveness analyzes of the At Home/Chez Soi (AHCS) trial, have been published. AHCS recruited participants in 5 Canadian cities from October 2009 to June 2011 and followed them for up to 24 months. At baseline, participants were classified as high-needs (HN) or moderate-needs (MN). HN participants were randomized to receive either HF with Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) or Treatment as Usual (TAU), while MN participants were randomized to receive either HF with Intensive Case Management (ICM) or TAU, until at least March 2013. In Montreal , HF services were reduced after March 2013. Participants' use of services over 6 months 4 years after baseline was collected between February 2014 and March 2015. Objectives. The goals of this thesis were to (1) provide an updated review of the economic impacts of HF and (2) evaluate the cost-effectiveness of HF in Montreal 48 months post-baseline. Methods. (1) A systematic review was performed on MEDLINE, Google, and the Homeless Hub repository, from January 2007 to December 2022. Study characteristics and results were extracted from selected studies; (2) Effectiveness was measured using the number of days of stable housing and days in one's own apartment. The cost-effectiveness of HF with ACT compared to TAU and HF with ICM compared to TAU were evaluated. Results. (1) Twenty-one studies were retained. Shelter, emergency department, and inpatient costs decreased with HF, while impacts on other health and justice costs were inconsistent. Among studies that reported the cost of the intervention, 2 of the 3 pre–post studies reported a decrease in net costs with HF. The 3 quasi-experimental studies with a comparison group reported an increase in net costs. Four of 5 experimental studies reported an increase in net costs, while one, conducted in France, reported cost offsets equal to the cost of the intervention. Two modeling studies projected that HF would be associated with decreased or marginally higher net costs over 10- and 35-year horizons. (2) 362 participants were included. At 43-48 months, in the HF with ACT group, 34.6% of participants received rent supplements, 7.1% received ACT, and 25.6% received both services. Corresponding percentages for the HF with ICM group were all 17.7%. The average cost for the HF with ACT group (71,859(9571,859 (95% CI: 52,300, 83,900))washigherthanfortheTAUgroup(83,900)) was higher than for the TAU group (67,448 (45,000,84,900)),andeffectivenesswassimilar(200(155,237)vs195(151,240))whenusingdaysofstablehousing.TheaveragecostwasslightlylowerfortheHFwithICMgroupthanforTAU(45,000, 84,900)), and effectiveness was similar (200 (155, 237) vs 195 (151, 240)) when using days of stable housing. The average cost was slightly lower for the HF with ICM group than for TAU (42,894 (32,900, 44,600) vs 44,301(44,301 (33,400, 48,800))whileeffectivenesswasgreater(274(253,293)vs225(190,257)).EffectivenessmeasuredasdaysinanapartmentwasgreaterfortheHFgroupforbothneedlevels.Theincrementalcosteffectivenessratio(ICER)was48,800)) while effectiveness was greater (274 (253, 293) vs 225 (190, 257)). Effectiveness measured as d ays in an apartment was greater for the HF group for both need levels. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was 873 per day of stable housing (undefined, 3,150)forHFwithACT,whileHFwithICMwasdominant(undefined,3,150) for HF with ACT, while HF with ICM was dominant (undefined, 356). When the measure of effectiveness was changed to days in an apartment, the ICER was 54perdayinanapartment(undefined,54 per day in an apartment (undefined, 2,842) for HF with ACT, while HF with ICM remained dominant (undefined, 71).Atupto71). At up to 250 per day of stable housing, HF with ACT had a 40% chance of being cost-effective, vs 96% for HF with ICM. Conclusion. The updated literature review, like the previous one, suggests that over a 2-year horizon, HF leads to significant cost offsets that are usually less than but may equal the intervention cost. The results appear to vary according to context. The results of the cost-effectiveness analysis suggest that HF can be cost saving and remain more effective following a reduction of services at 43-48 months for MN participants. A greater proportion of HN participants may require continuation of HF for the intervention to remain cost-effective. Alternate abstract: Background. Housing First (HF) is an intervention that provides rent supplements and support to people experiencing homelessness and mental illness. A 2015 literature review found that HF was associated with cost offsets, but these were generally less than the cost of the intervention. No updates have been made since, despite the publication of several studies, including the final results of the At Home/Chez Soi (AHCS) study. The AHCS study recruited participants in five Canadian cities between October 2009 and June 2011 and followed them for 21 to 24 months. At baseline, participants were classified as high-need (HN) or moderate-need (MN). HN participants were randomized to receive either LA with intensive follow-up (IF) or usual services (USS), while moderate-need (MN) participants were randomized to receive either LA with variable-intensity support (VIS) or USS, until at least March 2013. In Montreal, LA services were reduced after March 2013. Participants' service use in the 6 months prior to 4 years after study entry was collected between February 2014 and October 2015. Objectives. The objectives of this thesis were to (1) update the literature on the economic impacts of LA and (2) evaluate the cost-effectiveness of LA in Montreal 48 months after the baseline date. Approach. (1) We conducted a systematic review using MEDLINE, Google, and the Rond-point de l'itinérance, from January 2007 to December 2022. Data extracted included study design, economic perspective, sample size, population, duration, service utilization, cost compensation, and nature of the intervention; (2) Effectiveness was measured by the number of days of stable housing and the number of days spent in one's own apartment. The cost-effectiveness of LA with SI versus SH and LA with SIV versus SH was assessed. Results. (1) The study selected twenty-one articles. Costs related to accommodation, emergency services, and hospitalization decreased with LA, while impacts on other health and justice costs were inconsistent. Among studies that reported the cost of the intervention, 2 of the 3 pre-post studies found a net decrease in total costs related to LA. Three quasi-experimental studies with a comparison group found a net increase in total costs. Four of the five experimental studies found a net increase in total costs, while one of them, conducted in France, found a cost offset equal to the cost of the intervention. Modeling studies predict that HF would be associated with a marginal decrease or increase in net costs over 10- and 35-year horizons; (2) 362 participants were included. At 43-48 months, in the LA with SI group, 34.6% of participants received rent supplements, 7.1% received SI, and 25.6% received both services. The corresponding percentages for the LA with SIV group were all 17.7%. The mean cost for the LA with SI group (71,859(9571,859 (95% confidence interval: 52,300, 83,900))washigherthantheSHgroup(83,900)) was higher than the SH group (67,448 (45,000, 84,900)) and effectiveness was similar (200 (155, 237) vs 195 (151, 240)) when using days of stable housing for BÉ participants. However, for BM participants, the mean cost was lower for the LA with SIV group than for the SH group (42,894(42,894 (32,900, 44,600)vs.44,600) vs. 44,301 (33,400, 48,800)) while effectiveness was greater (274 (253, 293) vs. 225 (190, 257)). Effectiveness measured in number of days in an apartment was higher for the LA group for both levels of need. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was 873(undefined,873 (undefined, 3,150) per day of stable housing for the LA with SI, while the LA with SIV was dominant (undefined, 356).Whentheeffectivenessmeasurewaschangedtoapartmentdays,theICERwas356). When the effectiveness measure was changed to apartment days, the ICER was 54 (undefined, 2,842)perapartmentdayfortheLAwithSIgroup,whiletheLAwithSIVwasstilldominant(undefined,2,842) per apartment day for the LA with SI group, while the LA with SIV was still dominant (undefined, 71). At $250 per stable housing day, the cost-effectiveness ratio of the LA with SI program had a 40% chance of being cost-effective, compared with a 96% chance for the LA with SIV. Conclusion. The updated literature review, as well as the previous one, suggests that over a two-year horizon, LA leads to significant cost offsets that are generally less than, but can be equal to, the cost of the intervention. Results appear to vary by context. Results from the cost-effectiveness analysis suggest that LA may reduce total costs and remain more effective after a reduction in services at 43–48 months for BM participants. A larger proportion of BE participants may require continuation of LA for the intervention to remain cost-effective.
Chapter
La crisis sanitaria generada por COVID-19, debido a su naturaleza, localización y consecuencias es principalmente una crisis humanitaria, global y urbana, porque ha transformado profunda y velozmente el modo de vida de las ciudades. Principalmente durante el periodo de confinamiento, la pandemia exigió redefinir el uso del espacio privado, condicionó al extremo el uso del espacio público, puso de manifiesto las limitaciones del sistema de salud y de la seguridad social y al mismo tiempo que generó un fuerte incremento de la pobreza, produjo una amplificación de las desigualdades socioeconómicas y territoriales. Por ello, las principales preguntas planteadas en este libro colectivo son: ¿esta crisis global será un detonador para revisar y transformar profundamente el conjunto de políticas económicas, sociales y urbanas desplegadas por los diferentes ámbitos de gobierno —federal, estatal y municipal— a fin de crear ciudades sostenibles y saludables? ¿O si simplemente se trató de realizar un conjunto de acciones de contención ante la emergencia? Y ¿una vez superada la crisis, las políticas continuarán abonando al modelo de ciudad dispersa y difusa en la que prevalecen intensos procesos de segregación urbana y fragmentación social?
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.