We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This final chapter demonstrates how the State can fulfil its three fiduciary duties to end homelessness, maintain public property’s shared value, and legitimize laws that govern public space. This chapter unpacks each of these duties and explains their substantive content. Drawing on existing research, this chapter provides concrete proposals for how the State can respect each of its three fiduciary obligations related to homelessness and public property.
Whereas most of the cases analyzed in this book pertain to concept formation in relatively well-bounded constellations of activity systems, the case of Housing First 2.0 discussed in this chapter represents concept formation in a broad field of activities aimed at the eradication of homelessness, located at multiple levels from national policy and government strategy down to counties, cities, and housing units working with individual clients. As such, the concept formation process is also lengthy and far from linear. The chapter traces a process of practical experimentation and supportive research that led to the emerging germ cell concept of Housing First 2.0. It is still too early to say to what extent and in what timeframe the new concept may stabilize, generalize, and actually transform homelessness work nationwide. In other words, ascending to the new expanded concrete has only begun. The ascending to the concrete needs to be followed and supported over the long haul.
Our response to the opioid epidemic has been reactionary, however preventing future addiction saves lives and money. Methods to prevent opioid misuse and addiction are frequently placed in one of three categories: universal, selective, or indicated. Universal prevention addresses an entire group of people without respect to any factors that might predispose someone to addiction. Most school-based curricula and education for prescribers fall under this category. Selective interventions are geared towards a subset of a population indentified as a higher risk for opioid use disorder, for example programs developed for children who have experienced traumatic events. Finally, indicated prevention focuses on individuals who are already using opioids but do not yet meet criteria for a clinical diagnosis of opioid use disorder. No matter the type, all strategies have the potential to postiively impact individuals and communities through reduced rates of addiction, overdose, and death.
This chapter provides a brief introduction to the relational dynamics underlying ‘multiple exclusion homelessness’ and an approach to working in this area. Adults experiencing multiple exclusion homelessness have often, during their developmental years, experienced multiple homes, disrupted attachments, un-forecasted endings, multiple and short-lived figures of support – all experiences that can lead a person to develop an understandable anxiety about trusting anyone to remain stable in their life. These dynamics may inadvertently be recreated in the person’s adult life through the impermanency of different organisations they are involved with. Multiple exclusion homelessness can be understood as a late emerging symptom of underlying difficulties in someone’s relationships with care. A psychologically informed approach for staff working in the homeless sector is outlined. The staff-service user relationship, while often viewed as important within mainstream services, is commonly seen as a vehicle through which treatments can be completed rather than as the treatment itself. By contrast, a psychologically informed service for people experiencing multiple exclusion homelessness understands that the reverse is often more accurate: that the tasks and activities are really just the vehicle through which a relationship can develop that carries the possibility of developing a sense of safety, trust, and continuity.
In addition to adopting greater person-centred and recovery-oriented approach to build more productive partnerships between mental health staff and service users, mental health organisations that wish to become more socially inclusive need to develop partnerships with other agencies, particularly those that provide supported accommodation, supported education, and supported employment, so that these become more of a focus for care planning alongside traditional mental health interventions. Working in partnership to build bridges with local community resources and build capacity for the inclusion of people with mental health conditions acts to break down the stigma and discrimination that they experience. Services also need to ensure that people have access to personal budgets so that they are empowered to direct their own care and support. These approaches bring obvious benefits for carers too since creating a network of services and resources in the community for people will increase the social supports available and potentially reduce carer burden. Clinicians may also experience greater shared responsibility with other providers as they expand their community resource networks and are further rewarded by witnessing people building successful and participatory lives in the community.
Housing First (HF), a recovery-oriented approach, was proven effective in stabilising housing situations of homeless individuals with severe mental disorders, yet had limited effectiveness on recovery outcomes on a short-term basis compared to standard treatment. The objective was to assess the effects of the HF model among homeless people with high support needs for mental and physical health services on recovery, housing stability, quality of life, health care use, mental symptoms and addiction issues on 4 years of data from the Un Chez Soi d'Abord trial.
Methods
A multicentre randomised controlled trial was conducted from August 2011 to April 2018 with intent-to-treat analysis in four French cities: Lille, Marseille, Paris and Toulouse. Participants were homeless or precariously-housed patients with a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of bipolar disorder or schizophrenia. Two groups were compared: the HF group (n = 353) had immediate access to independent housing and support from the assertive community treatment team; the Treatment-As-Usual (TAU) group (n = 350) had access to existing support and services. Main outcomes were personal recovery (Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) scale), housing stability, quality of life (S-QoL), global physical and mental status (Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36)), inpatient days, mental symptoms (Modified Colorado Symptom Index (MCSI)) and addictions (Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) and Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT)). Mixed models using longitudinal and cluster designs were performed and adjusted to first age on the street, gender and mental disorder diagnosis. Models were tested for time × group and site × time interactions.
Results
The 703 participants [123 (18%) female] had a mean age of 39 years (95% CI 38.0–39.5 years). Both groups improved RAS index from baseline to 48 months, with no statistically significant changes found between the HF and TAU groups over time. HF patients exhibited better autonomy (adjusted β = 2.6, 95% CI 1.2–4.1) and sentimental life (2.3, 95% CI 0.5–4.1), higher housing stability (28.6, 95% CI 25.1–32.1), lower inpatient days (−3.14, 95% CI −5.2 to −1.1) and improved SF-36 mental composite score (−0.8, 95% CI −1.6 to −0.1) over the 4-year follow-up. HF participants experienced higher alcohol consumption between baseline and 48 months. No significant differences were observed for self-reported mental symptoms or substance dependence.
Conclusion
Data at 4 years were consistent with 2-year follow-up data: similar improvement in personal recovery outcomes but higher housing stability, autonomy and lower use of hospital services in the HF group compared to the TAU group, with the exception of an ongoing alcohol issue. These sustained benefits support HF as a valuable intervention for the homeless patients with severe mental illness.
Community-based harm reduction for alcohol use disorder (AUD) entails a compassionate stance and pragmatic strategies that minimize alcohol-related harm and enhance quality of life. Community-based harm reduction approaches aim to meet people where they are both in their communities and with respect to their motivation for change. Harm reduction approaches do not require or prioritize abstinence or alcohol use reduction as the sole or most desirable recovery pathway. To date, community-based harm reduction approaches have been applied and investigated primarily within marginalized populations, particularly people experiencing homelessness and AUD. Randomized controlled trials have established efficacy for the low-barrier, non-abstinence-based Housing First approach and for community-based harm-reduction treatment. Managed alcohol programs and meaningful activities programming have shown promising findings in nonrandomized trials and warrant further study. The chapter concludes with reflections on key themes undergirding work in community-based harm reduction and how it has positively affected individuals and communities.
Many people who are homeless with severe mental illnesses are high users of healthcare services and social services, without reducing widen health inequalities in this vulnerable population. This study aimed to determine whether independent housing with mental health support teams with a recovery-oriented approach (Housing First (HF) program) for people who are homeless with severe mental disorders improves hospital and emergency department use.
Methods
We did a randomised controlled trial in four French cities: Lille, Marseille, Paris and Toulouse. Participants were eligible if they were 18 years or older, being absolutely homeless or precariously housed, with a diagnosis of schizophrenia (SCZ) or bipolar disorder (BD) and were required to have a high level of needs (moderate-to-severe disability and past hospitalisations over the last 5 years or comorbid alcohol or substance use disorder). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to immediate access to independent housing and support from the Assertive Community Treatment team (social worker, nurse, doctor, psychiatrist and peer worker) (HF group) or treatment as usual (TAU group) namely pre-existing dedicated homeless-targeted programs and services. Participants and interviewers were unmasked to assignment. The primary outcomes were the number of emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalisation admissions and inpatient days at 24 months. Secondary outcomes were recovery (Recovery Assessment Scale), quality of life (SQOL and SF36), mental health symptoms, addiction issues, stably housed days and cost savings from a societal perspective. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed.
Results
Eligible patients were randomly assigned to the HF group (n = 353) or TAU group (n = 350). No differences were found in the number of hospital admissions (relative risk (95% CI), 0.96 (0.76–1.21)) or ED visits (0.89 (0.66–1.21)). Significantly less inpatient days were found for HF v. TAU (0.62 (0.48–0.80)). The HF group exhibited higher housing stability (difference in slope, 116 (103–128)) and higher scores for sub-dimensions of S-QOL scale (psychological well-being and autonomy). No differences were found for physical composite score SF36, mental health symptoms and rates of alcohol or substance dependence. Mean difference in costs was €-217 per patient over 24 months in favour of the HF group. HF was associated with cost savings in healthcare costs (RR 0.62(0.48–0.78)) and residential costs (0.07 (0.05–0.11)).
Conclusion
An immediate access to independent housing and support from a mental health team resulted in decreased inpatient days, higher housing stability and cost savings in homeless persons with SCZ or BP disorders.
Little is known about outcomes of drug abuse related to attainment of stable housing. This study examined outcomes of cocaine use and service provision in an urban homeless sample.
Methods.
Two-year longitudinal study of systematically selected homeless individuals (N = 255) in St. Louis, Missouri from 1999 to 2001. The sample was interviewed three times annually using a structured diagnostic interview. Urine drug testing was conducted at every interview, and service utilisation data were obtained from the structured interviews and the agency-provided service use data.
Results.
Cocaine use disorder and cocaine use proved to be distinct concepts because they predicted different outcomes across time. Cocaine use predicted subsequent poor housing outcomes, but stable housing had no apparent effect on subsequent use of cocaine. Service use predicted neither subsequent reduced cocaine use nor attainment of stable housing. Services used were appropriate to type of mental health need, but cocaine use may have reduced successful utilisation of appropriate psychiatric services.
Conclusion.
These findings reinforce the concept that homelessness represents a complex phenomenon and consequently, service systems need to address multiple problems. Service approaches are needed that simultaneously address the complex needs of homeless individuals.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.