The Interplay Between Housing Stability and Child Separation: Implications for Practice and Policy

Abstract

Greater understanding of how residential stability affects child separation and reunification among homeless families can guide both child welfare and homeless policy and practice. This article draws upon two longitudinal studies examining services and housing for homeless families and their relationship to family and housing stability. Both studies were conducted in the same state at roughly the same time with similar instruments. The first study, examining families' experiences and outcomes following entry into the homeless service system in three counties in Washington State, found that at 18 months following shelter entry, families that are intact with their children were significantly more likely to be housed in their own housing (46%) than families that were separated from one or more of their children (31%). The second study, a quasiexperimental evaluation of a supportive housing program for homeless families with multiple housing barriers, found that the rates of reunification for Child Protective Services (CPS)-involved families receiving supportive housing was comparable to that for families entering public housing without services, but significantly higher than the rate of reunification for families entering shelter. Taken together, the findings from both studies contribute to the evidence underscoring the importance of housing assistance to homeless families involved in the child welfare system.

Housing and Child Welfare: Emerging Evidence and Implications for Scaling up Services

“…A descriptive study of families ( n = 1720) exiting a supportive housing program delivered through Connecticut’s child welfare system showed improvements in stable housing and employment among families with complete data; a subset also showed improvements in parenting and home environments for children (Farrell, Britner, Guzzardo, & Goodrich, 2010). A quasi-experiment conducted with chronically homeless child welfare-involved families ( n = 189) in Washington State showed no differences in the frequency of family separations but significant increases in reunification for children already placed out of home over a 12-month period compared with a matched comparison group of homeless families (Rog, Henderson, Lun, Greer, & Ellis, in press). Comparisons suggested that families who received supportive housing were more similar to families with public housing vouchers.…”

“…Although effect sizes appear more modest, permanent housing shows promise in keeping families together among those already under investigation (Fowler, Brown, et al, 2017b; Pergamit et al, in press). The value added remains uncertain when housing vouchers are used to promote reunification or combined with additional case management (Farrell et al, 2010; Pergamit et al, in press; Rog et al, in press). However, vouchers are scarce; families retain vouchers as long as needed, which leads to slow turnover.…”

Housing and Child Well Being: Implications for Research, Policy, and Practice

“…We turn next to a series of papers that evaluate the effects of housing interventions targeting different homeless populations (Newman & Holupka, ; Shinn, Brown & Gubits, in press; Pergamit, Cunningham & Hanson, ; Fowler & Schoeny, ; Rog, Henderson, Lun, Greer & Ellis, ). The studies use experimental or rigorous quasi‐experimental designs to test the impact of permanent and permanent supportive housing models on child and family well being.…”

“…Housing interventions reduce family homelessness that is related with reductions in family separations (Fowler, Farrell, Marcal, Chung & Hovmand, ; Pergamit et al., ; Rog et al., ; Shinn et al., ) and provide some benefit for child well being (Newman & Holupka, ; Gubits et al., ). Yet, risk for child maltreatment and child welfare involvement remains (Gubits et al., ; Fowler & Schoeny, ; Pergamit et al., ; Rog et al., ). The complex needs of homeless families likely require multicomponent interventions of as‐yet unknown duration, while the role of prevention remains unclear.…”

“…Rog et al. () tested more intensive interventions that pair housing with supportive services across two evaluations in Washington state. In the first study, a one‐group pretest–posttest design shows families entering homeless shelters who receive rapid rehousing with supportive services show no change in removal of children from home over 18 months, while 25% of families reunify with children already placed out of home.…”