Around 60 000 people in England live in mental health supported accommodation. There are three main types: residential care, supported housing and floating outreach. Supported housing and floating outreach aim to support service users in moving on to more independent accommodation within 2 years, but there has been little research investigating their effectiveness.

A 30-month prospective cohort study investigating outcomes for users of mental health supported accommodation.

We used random sampling, accounting for relevant geographical variation factors, to recruit 87 services (22 residential care, 35 supported housing and 30 floating outreach) and 619 service users (residential care 159, supported housing 251, floating outreach 209) across England. We contacted services every 3 months to investigate the proportion of service users who successfully moved on to more independent accommodation. Multilevel modelling was used to estimate how much of the outcome and cost variations were due to service type and quality, after accounting for service-user characteristics.

Overall 243/586 participants successfully moved on (residential care 15/146, supported housing 96/244, floating outreach 132/196). This was most likely for floating outreach service users (versus residential care: odds ratio 7.96, 95% CI 2.92–21.69, P < 0.001; versus supported housing: odds ratio 2.74, 95% CI 1.01–7.41, P < 0.001) and was associated with reduced costs of care and two aspects of service quality: promotion of human rights and recovery-based practice.

Most people do not move on from supported accommodation within the expected time frame. Greater focus on human rights and recovery-based practice may increase service effectiveness.

This paper includes a brief review of the historical and policy background to a new form of supported accommodation, the Individual Care Package (ICP). This is a co-ordinated, individualised and flexible method to support people with complex mental health problems in the community.

The study aimed to describe the implementation of this new form of care in Gloucestershire, England, over a 5-year period. We aimed to audit the quality of care in the packages against six care standards, derived by a project steering group. Staff working in community mental health services and staff providing ICPs were asked to report their levels of satisfaction with care provision.

A total of 35 ICPs were developed, mostly relating to service users with severe mental illness. Only 60% of the community mental health team key workers were aware of the expected level of care. In many cases, service users were accessing support from day services or family alongside the ICP. Four service users were admitted, and four moved accommodation after going into ICPs. Overall, levels of care provided within ICPs tended to remain static. Trust key workers were mostly satisfied with the support provided in ICPs, but a range of concerns were expressed. ICP staff reported mostly positive views about the support that they received from statutory services, but also reported some concerns.

ICPs appeared to be successful in enabling a number of service users with complex difficulties to obtain and maintain tenancies in the community. There were some concerns about the quality of monitoring of the ICPs and some uncertainty about whether ICP staff would have the skills, support and training to promote recovery and increasing independence of service users. There was little evidence of service users moving on or reduction in care over time. There is a need for good inter-agency working for the successful deployment of this new form of service. There is also a need for more research, comparing ICPs with other forms of supported accommodation and considering the service user experience through qualitative research.