EBP Exchange - UMB School of Social Work

This is one of few RCTs I’ve seen that addressed the issue of homelessness.  There were three conditions, as I understand it (Housing First [Pathways] plus ACT, ACT without Pathways, and customary and usual services condition). These were developed and used for about 300 clients. Almost two years after Housing First was introduced into the county, results indicate that participants assigned to Housing First were placed in permanent housing at higher rates than the treatment-as-usual group, who had received the county’s standard array of services.Over the course of almost four years, 68% of participants who entered housing through Housing First were able to keep it without having to satisfy requirements for treatment and sobriety. Pathways’ retention rate after four years, which was just below 80%, is noteworthy, especially given the sample’s chronic homelessness and high rates of shelter recidivism and co-occurring substance use disorder. As compared to Pathways—the Consortium, an agency with several years of experience providing Housing First services—was involved with many more possible clients and had approximately the same number retained in permanent housing.  Although there were limitations in the design with only partial adherence to participation in the assigned arm of the RCT, this still represents an important effort that impresses me with it’s efforts to recruit, assign, serve, and follow a large sample of mentally ill and homeless individuals.  It is worth the read. I found it on Medscape, which is free.  Here’s the url, http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/561611_5, and the citation.

 Stefancic, A. & Sam Tsemberis, S (2007).  Community-wide strategies for preventing homelessness: Recent evidence: Recent Evidence. Journal of Primary Prevention, 28, 265-279.