The implementation and adaptation of the Housing First (HF) model represented profound changes the structure and delivery, goals, and principles of homeless services. These features of homeless services directly influence providers, their work performance and the clients’ outcomes. The present research, conducted in eight European countries, investigated how social providers working in HF or TS (Traditional Staircase) describe and conceptualize the goals and the principles of their services. Data were collected through 29 focus group discussions involving 121 providers. The results showed that HF and TS had similar and different goals for their clients in the following areas: support, social integration, satisfaction of needs, housing, and well-being. HF providers emphasized clients’ autonomy and ability to determine their personal goals, with housing being considered a start on the path of recovery, while TS were more focused on individual clients’ basic needs with respect to food, health and finding temporary accommodations. HF providers privileged the person-centered approach and housing as a right, while TS providers were more focused on helping everyone. Implications of the results are discussed as suggestions both for practice and for research.

H akan K€ allm en, 9 Jos e Ornelas, 2 and the HOME-EU Consortium Study Group Highlights• Housing First reports more service user recovery but little is known about how this is achieved.• Certain features of homeless services are likely to promote service users' recovery.• Housing First service users reported more choice, better housing quality, and more satisfaction.• Service features predicted independent housing, psychiatric symptoms, and community integration.• Across socio-political and economic contexts, Housing First predicts greater recovery than traditional services.

The purpose of this systematic review and narrative synthesis was to identify homeless interventions with empowering features and evaluate their effectiveness for developing the psychological empowerment of services users. To identify and evaluate intervention studies, we combined the theoretical frameworks of empowering settings and psychological empowerment (PE). Our conceptualization of PE included outcomes aligned with the intrapersonal, interactional, and behavioral components. Relational outcomes were also included and conceptualized as antecedents for PE development. After systematic searching and screening, 37 studies were included for review. Interventions with empowering features included supported housing, case management, skills and knowledge acquisition, and mutual support. Interventions that were competency‐building effectively improved outcomes aligned with the intrapersonal PE component. Interventions that were collaborative and competency‐building effectively improved outcomes aligned with the behavioral PE component. Weak evidence suggested that interventions with empowering features may effectively improve outcomes aligned with the interactional PE component. Interventions that promoted and developed support effectively improved relational antecedents. Findings align the empirical evidence for homeless interventions with theoretical conceptions of empowering features and processes. Findings may be applied to the design and implementation of homeless interventions to incorporate empowering features and to facilitate the development of homeless services users’ PE. Empowerment theory was applied to review homeless interventions literature. Empowering homeless interventions included supported housing and mutual support, for example. Empowering interventions contributed to indicators of emotional and behavioral empowerment. Fewer empowering interventions contributed to indicators of cognitive empowerment. Service user involvement may facilitate improvements in indicators of psychological empowerment.

Although Housing First (HF) has gained widespread support as a service model to end homelessness, staircase services (SS)

Background Homeless services expend considerable resources to provide for service users’ most basic needs, such as food and shelter, but their track record for ending homelessness is disappointing. An alternative model, Housing First, reversed the order of services so that homeless individuals are offered immediate access to independent housing, with wraparound supports but no treatment or abstinence requirements. Although the evidence base for Housing First’s effectiveness in ending homelessness is robust, less is known about its effectiveness in promoting recovery. Objective The objective of this research is to compare rehabilitation- and recovery-related outcomes of homeless services users who are engaged in either Housing First or traditional staircase services in eight European countries: France, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden. Methods A mixed methods, multi-site investigation of Housing First and traditional services will compare quantitative outcomes at two time points. Key rehabilitation outcomes include stable housing and psychiatric symptoms. Key growth outcomes include community integration and acquired capabilities. Semistructured interviews will be used to examine service users’ experiences of environmental constraints and affordances on acquired capabilities to identify features of homeless services that enhance service users’ capabilities sets. Multi-level modelling will be used to test for group differences—Housing First versus traditional services—on key outcome variables. Thematic analysis will be used to understand the ways in which service users make sense of internal and external affordances and constraints on capabilities. Results The study is registered with the European Commission (registration number: H2020-SC6-REVINEQUAL-2016/ GA726997). Two press releases, a research report to the funding body, two peer-reviewed articles, and an e-book chapter are planned for dissemination of the final results. The project was funded from September 2016 through September 2019. Expected results will be disseminated in 2019 and 2020. Conclusions We will use the findings from this research to formulate recommendations for European social policy on the configuration of homeless services and the scaling up and scaling out of Housing First programs. From our findings, we will draw conclusions about the setting features that promote individuals’ exits from homelessness, rehabilitation, and recovery. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) RR1-10.2196/14584