Cost-effectiveness of Supported Housing for Homeless Persons With Mental Illness

Rosenheck, Robert A.; Kasprow, Wesley J.; Frisman, Linda K.; Liu‐Mares, Wen

doi:10.1001/archpsyc.60.9.940

Cited by 287 publications

(345 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

315

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…35 The latter two interventions improved housing outcomes without reducing substance use. The present intervention appeared to enhance employment (at least among men) and housing outcomes while also reducing substance use (as reported 19 ).…”

Section: Potential Benefitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-Term Housing and Work Outcomes Among Treated Cocaine-Dependent Homeless Persons

Kertesz

Mullins

Schumacher

et al. 2006

J Behav Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Communities across the United States have initiated plans to end chronic homelessness. In many of these communities, addiction treatment programs remain the default point of entry to housing and services. This study examined the percentage of cocaine-using homeless persons (all with psychiatric distress) attaining stable housing and employment 12 months after entering a randomized trial of intensive behavioral day treatment, plus one of the following for 6 months: no housing; housing contingent on drug abstinence; housing not contingent on abstinence. Of 138 participants, the percentages with stable housing and employment at 12 months were 34.1% and 33.3%, respectively. Analyses suggested superior outcomes in trial arms that offered housing as part of the behavioral treatment. The majority of participants, however, did not achieve housing or employment, in part because of the limited capacity of the local housing programs to accommodate persons who had not achieved perfect abstinence. The findings demonstrate a helpful role for addiction treatment, and suggest a role for services to support housing of persons who reduce but do not eliminate all substance use.

show abstract

Section: Potential Benefitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-Term Housing and Work Outcomes Among Treated Cocaine-Dependent Homeless Persons

Kertesz

Mullins

Schumacher

et al. 2006

J Behav Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Unfortunately, a complete picture of costs associated with these housing services is not available. Studies of supported housing approaches have produced contradictory findings of cost benefits, although they have found clear evidence of improved housing outcomes (Gulcur et al, 2003;Rosenheck, 2000;Rosenheck et al, 2003). As previously noted, Dickey et al (1997) found that supportive housing (group living) is more expensive than supported housing (independent living), suggesting that if there were a shift from custodial or group living to supported housing, costs could be reduced and potentially more consumers could be better served.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…A number of controlled, longitudinal studies have been conducted that clearly demonstrate that housing subsidy programs are successful in enabling consumers to gain access to, and to maintain, stable housing (Dickey et al, 1996;Dickey, Latimer, Powers, Gonzalez, & Goldfinger, 1997;Goldfinger et al, 1997;Goldfinger et al, 1999;Gulcur, Stefancic, Shinn, Tsemberis, & Fischer, 2003;Hurlburt, Wood, & Hough, 1996;Newman, Reschovsky, Kaneda, & Hendrick, 1994;Rog & Randolph, 2002;Rosenheck, Kasprow, Frisman, & Liu-Mares, 2003;Shern et al, 1997;Tsemberis, 1999;Tsemberis & Eisenberg, 2000;Tsemberis, Gulcur, & Nakae, 2004;Tsemberis, Moran, Shinn, Asmussen, & Shern, 2003). These programs include Section 8 certificates in the United States that enable people "to pay a fixed 30% of their income for a private rental unit" (Hurlburt et al, 1996, p. 310).…”

Section: An Evidence Foundationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strengthening Ontario's System of Housing for People with Serious Mental Illness

SylvestreJohn

GeorgeLindsey

AubryTim

et al. 2007

Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article describes recent work to support recommendations for improving Ontario's system of housing for people with serious mental illness. This multifaceted project engaged stakeholders in discussions concerning strategies for improving the system based on (a) values that underlie housing programs, (b) evidence of effective housing practices, (c) the current status of the system, and (d) international practices for monitoring community mental health systems. Stakeholders reviewed summaries of the work and discussed implications for improving the provincial system of housing and supports. Recommendations are made for improving the system, focusing on both regional and provincial level actions. Housing is an essential component of an effective community mental health system for people with serious mental illness. Without accessible, good quality housing and support, successful community living and recovery are not possible. Ontario has provided housing dedicated to people with serious mental illness since the onset of deinstitutionalization. Since the 1960s, the system has grown substantially to encompass a variety of forms of housing and to become a cornerstone of the community mental health system. Despite its growth and importance, this housing system faces a number of significant challenges. It remains inadequate for meeting consumer demand, with very long waiting lists reported by most programs in the province. There is a lack of good data on the system, documenting who is being served and how they are being served, as well as on the needs of those who cannot access the system. This lack of information makes it difficult to effectively manage the system and to plan for its future.In 2003, the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care funded a research project to examine the province's dedicated housing system and to make recommendations for improving it. This paper describes the multifaceted project that was conducted to develop a foundation for planning system improvements. The project developed three foundations for system planning: (a) a vision for the system by identifying values that should guide the delivery of services, (b) research evidence about the status of the system and effective practices, and (c) consultations with stakeholders from across the province about directions for system improvement.

show abstract

“…HUD-VASH offers homeless veterans with disabilities a Section 8 housing voucher funded by HUD and intensive case management from VA clinical staff, who are mostly social workers. A randomized controlled trial of the original HUD-VASH showed that clients in HUD-VASH had more days housed than those who only received case management without subsidized housing or those who only received standard care [18]. However, there were no group differences on mental health and quality of life outcomes, although HUD-VASH clients showed greater improvement in alcohol and drug problems [19].…”

Section: Program Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of group treatment among case managers in Department of Veterans Affairs supported housing program

Tsai¹,

Rosenheck²

2013

JRRD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Because the predominant supported housing model includes individual intensive community-based case management, use of group treatments in supported housing has not been adequately studied. This study examined practices and attitudes about groups among case managers in the Department of Housing and Urban Development-Department of Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) program. We examined national administrative HUD-VASH data and an online survey of case managers from eight sites in the New England region, where dissemination of a new group-based model is in progress. Compared with other sites nationally, sites in the New England region had more group contacts, possibly reflecting the dissemination project. Among the New England sites (n = 8), administrative data showed that a higher percentage of group contacts was associated with a greater number of clients served and with more contacts per client. Although case manager survey data (n = 55) showed generally positive attitudes about using groups, particularly about the potential effectiveness of groups and peer support, greater reported use of groups was not associated with more positive attitudes about groups. These findings suggest providing group treatments in supported housing programs may help case managers stay connected to clients and case managers appear receptive to using groups, though further research is needed.

show abstract

Cost-effectiveness of Supported Housing for Homeless Persons With Mental Illness

Abstract: Supported housing for homeless people with mental illness results in superior housing outcomes than intensive case management alone or standard care and modestly increases societal costs.

Cited by 287 publications

References 47 publications

Long-Term Housing and Work Outcomes Among Treated Cocaine-Dependent Homeless Persons

Long-Term Housing and Work Outcomes Among Treated Cocaine-Dependent Homeless Persons

Strengthening Ontario's System of Housing for People with Serious Mental Illness

Use of group treatment among case managers in Department of Veterans Affairs supported housing program

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About