Problems maintaining collaborative approaches with excluded populations in a randomised control trial: lessons learned implementing Housing First in France

Abstract

BackgroundIn 2006, a local collective combating homelessness set up an ‘experimental squat’ in an abandoned building in Marseille, France’s second largest city. They envisioned the squat as an alternative to conventional health and social services for individuals experiencing long-term homelessness and severe psychiatric disorders. Building on what they learned from the squat, some then joined a larger coalition that succeeded in convincing national government decision-makers to develop a scientific, intervention-based programme based on the Housing First model. This article analyses the political process through which social movement activism gave way to support for a state-funded programme for homeless people with mental disorders.MethodsA qualitative study of this political process was conducted between 2006 and 2014, using a hybrid theoretical perspective that combines attention to both top-down and bottom-up actions with a modified Advocacy Coalition Framework. In addition to document analysis of published and grey literature linked to the policy process, researchers drew on participant observation and observant participation of the political process. Data analysis consisted primarily of a thematic analysis of field-notes and semi-structured interviews with 65 relevant actors.ResultsA coalition of local activists, state officials and national service providers transformed knowledge about a local innovation (an experimental therapeutic squat) into the rationale for a national, scientifically based project consisting of a randomised controlled trial of four state-supported Housing First sites, costing several million euros. The coalition’s strategy was two-pronged, namely to defend a social cause (the right to housing) and to promote a scientifically validated means of realising positive outcomes (housing tenure) and cost-effectiveness (reduced hospitalisation costs).ConclusionActivists’ self-agency, especially that of making themselves audible to public authorities, was enhanced by the coalition’s ability to seize ‘windows of opportunities’ to their advantage. However, in contrast to the United States and Canadian Housing First contexts, which are driven by implementation science and related approaches, it was grassroots activists who promoted a scientific-technical approach among government officials unfamiliar with evidence-based practices in France. The windows of opportunity nevertheless failed to attract participation of those most in need of housing, raising the question of whether and how marginalised and/or subordinate groups can be integrated into collaborative research when a social movement-driven innovation turns into a scientific approach.Trial registrationThe current clinical trial number is NCT01570712. Registered July 17, 2011. First patient enrolled August 18, 2011.

The evidence‐based group‐level symptom‐reduction model as the organizing principle for mental health care: time for change?

“…The diagnosis‐EBP model and the existential domain are complementary from a treatment perspective, as the former has its focus on the psychometric outcome of symptom reduction and the latter on the personal process of resilience. Working on resilience means a focus on things like being connected to other people, narrative development, positive emotions, sense of purpose, material resources and acceptance, requiring novel service initiatives such as a “recovery college” , structural peer support, “housing first” , “individual placement and support” , and “open dialog” , which can be difficult to implement in traditional mental health services.…”

Goals and Principles of Providers Working with People Experiencing Homelessness: A Comparison Between Housing First and Traditional Staircase Services in Eight European Countries

“…Previous studies have shown the effectiveness of the HF model on people experiencing homelessness’ outcomes (recovery, housing stability) [5,6,7,8], but less research has taken place in Europe [2,9,10,11] or focused on the providers’ point of view [12,13,14]. However, in Europe, the Program ‘Europe 2020′ emphasizes the need to develop integrated strategies to reduce social exclusion and extreme marginalization.…”

Housing First for homeless people with severe mental illness: extended 4-year follow-up and analysis of recovery and housing stability from the randomized Un Chez Soi d'Abord trial

“…Second, blinding was not possible for the interviewers or participants (Hawthorne effect) (McCambridge et al ., 2014). In particular, sociologists observed that participants in the TAU group had a sense of unfairness in being attributed to the control group and overachievers (Rhenter et al ., 2018 b ). Third, our study was based on interviews with self-reported outcomes.…”