Search

The complexity of homeless service users' characteristics and the contextual challenges faced by services can make the experience of working with people in homelessness stressful and can put providers' well-being at risk. In the current study, we investigated the association between service characteristics (i.e., the availability of training and supervision and the capability-fostering approach) and social service providers' work engagement and burnout. The study involved 497 social service providers working in homeless services in eight different European countries (62% women; mean age = 40.73, SD = 10.45) and was part of the Horizon 2020 European study "Homelessness as Unfairness (HOME_EU)." Using hierarchical linear modeling (HLM), findings showed that the availability of training and supervision were positively associated with providers' work engagement and negatively associated with burnout. However, results varied based on the perceived usefulness of the training and supervision provided within the service and the specific outcome considered. The most consistent finding was the association between the degree to which a service promotes users' capabilities and all the aspects of providers' well-being analyzed. Results are discussed in relation to their implications for how configuration of homeless services can promote social service providers' well-being and high-quality care., (© 2020 Society for Community Research and Action.)

Across Europe, as governments turn to housing-led strategies in attempts to reverse rising rates of homelessness, increasing numbers of Housing First (HF) programs are being implemented. As HF programs become more widespread, it is important to understand how service users experience them compared to the more prevalent traditional treatment-first approach to addressing long-term homelessness. Although there is a large body of research on service users' experiences of Housing First compared to treatment-first in North American contexts, comparatively less is known about how these two categories of homeless services are experienced in the European context. In a correlational and cross-sectional study, part of a larger examination of homelessness in Europe, participants (n = 520) engaged with either HF (n = 245) or traditional services (TS; n = 275) programs in seven countries completed measures of their experiences of services (consumer choice, housing quality, and service satisfaction) and recovery (time in independent housing, psychiatric symptoms, and community integration). Across the seven countries, participants engaged with HF programs reported experiencing more consumer choice, better perceived housing quality, and more satisfaction with services than participants engaged in TS programs. Participants in HF programs also reported a greater proportion of time in independent accommodation, fewer psychiatric symptoms, and more community integration. Varying patterns of association between experiences of services and recovery outcomes were observed. Findings indicate HF consistently predicts greater recovery than TS across diverse sociopolitical and economic contexts. Implications of findings for configurations of homeless services and homeless services policy are discussed., (© 2019 Society for Community Research and Action.)

Background: Marginalised communities such as homeless people, people who use drugs (PWUD), lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people (LGBTI), prisoners, sex workers and undocumented migrants are at high risk of poor health and yet face substantial barriers in accessing health and support services. The Nobody Left Outside (NLO) Service Design Checklist aims to promote a collaborative, evidence-based approach to service design and monitoring based on equity, non-discrimination and community engagement., Methods: The Checklist was a collaborative project involving nine community advocacy organisations, with a focus on homeless people, PWUD, LGBTI people, prisoners, sex workers, and undocumented migrants. The Checklist was devised via a literature review; two NLO platform meetings; a multistakeholder policy workshop and an associated published concept paper; two conference presentations; and stakeholder consultation via a European Commission-led Thematic Network (including webinar)., Results: The NLO Checklist has six sections in line with the WHO Health Systems Framework. These are: (1) service delivery, comprising design stage (6 items), services provided (2 items), accessibility and adaptation (16 items), peer support (2 items); (2) health workforce (12 items); (3) health information systems (7 items); (4) medical products and technologies (1 item); (5) financing (3 items); and (6) leadership and governance (7 items). It promotes the implementation of integrated (colocated or linked) healthcare services that are community based and people centred. These should provide a continuum of needs-based health promotion, disease prevention, diagnosis, treatment and management, together with housing, legal and social support services, in alignment with the goals of universal health coverage and the WHO frameworks on integrated, people-centred healthcare., Conclusions: The Checklist is offered as a practical tool to help overcome inequalities in access to health and support services. Policymakers, public health bodies, healthcare authorities, practitioner bodies, peer support workers and non-governmental organisations can use it when developing, updating or monitoring services for target groups. It may also assist civil society in wider advocacy efforts to improve access for underserved communities., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JVL reports research grants from AbbVie, Gilead and MSD, outside of the submitted work. LB is an employee of Interel (Brussels, Belgium), which received fees from MSD as part of the grant supporting the NLO initiative., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Homeless services expend considerable resources to provide for service users' most basic needs, such as food and shelter, but their track record for ending homelessness is disappointing. An alternative model, Housing First, reversed the order of services so that homeless individuals are offered immediate access to independent housing, with wraparound supports but no treatment or abstinence requirements. Although the evidence base for Housing First's effectiveness in ending homelessness is robust, less is known about its effectiveness in promoting recovery., Objective: The objective of this research is to compare rehabilitation- and recovery-related outcomes of homeless services users who are engaged in either Housing First or traditional staircase services in eight European countries: France, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden., Methods: A mixed methods, multi-site investigation of Housing First and traditional services will compare quantitative outcomes at two time points. Key rehabilitation outcomes include stable housing and psychiatric symptoms. Key growth outcomes include community integration and acquired capabilities. Semistructured interviews will be used to examine service users' experiences of environmental constraints and affordances on acquired capabilities to identify features of homeless services that enhance service users' capabilities sets. Multi-level modelling will be used to test for group differences-Housing First versus traditional services-on key outcome variables. Thematic analysis will be used to understand the ways in which service users make sense of internal and external affordances and constraints on capabilities., Results: The study is registered with the European Commission (registration number: H2020-SC6-REVINEQUAL-2016/ GA726997). Two press releases, a research report to the funding body, two peer-reviewed articles, and an e-book chapter are planned for dissemination of the final results. The project was funded from September 2016 through September 2019. Expected results will be disseminated in 2019 and 2020., Conclusions: We will use the findings from this research to formulate recommendations for European social policy on the configuration of homeless services and the scaling up and scaling out of Housing First programs. From our findings, we will draw conclusions about the setting features that promote individuals' exits from homelessness, rehabilitation, and recovery., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): RR1-10.2196/14584., (©Ronni Michelle Greenwood, Rachel M Manning, Branagh R O'Shaughnessy, Oisin Cross, Maria J Vargas-Moniz, Pascal Auquier, Massimo Santinello, Judith R Wolf, Anna Bokszczanin, Roberto Bernad, Håkan Källmén, Frederik Spinnewijn, José Ornelas, HOME_EU Consortium. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (http://www.researchprotocols.org), 05.02.2020.)

Objectives: To examine the lifetime, 5-year and past-year prevalence of homelessness among European citizens in eight European nations., Design: A nationally representative telephone survey using trained bilingual interviewers and computer-assisted telephone interview software., Setting: The study was conducted in France, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain and Sweden., Participants: European adult citizens, selected from opt-in panels from March to December 2017. Total desired sample size was 5600, with 700 per country. Expected response rates of approximately 30% led to initial sample sizes of 2500 per country., Main Outcome Measures: History of homelessness was assessed for lifetime, past 5 years and past year. Sociodemographic data were collected to assess correlates of homelessness prevalence using generalised linear models for clustered and weighted samples., Results: Response rates ranged from 30.4% to 33.5% (n=5631). Homelessness prevalence was 4.96% for lifetime (95% CI 4.39% to 5.59%), 1.92% in the past 5 years (95% CI 1.57% to 2.33%) and 0.71% for the past year (95% CI 0.51% to 0.98%) and varied significantly between countries (pairwise comparison difference test, p<0.0001). Time spent homeless ranged between less than a week (21%) and more than a year (18%), with high contrasts between countries (p<0.0001). Male gender, age 45-54, lower secondary education, single status, unemployment and an urban environment were all independently strongly associated with lifetime homelessness (all OR >1.5)., Conclusions: The prevalence of homelessness among the surveyed nations is significantly higher than might be expected from point-in-time and homeless service use statistics. There was substantial variation in estimated prevalence across the eight nations. Coupled with the well-established health impacts of homelessness, medical professionals need to be aware of the increased health risks of those with experience of homelessness. These findings support policies aiming to improve health services for people exposed to homelessness., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Addressing Citizen's perspectives on homelessness is crucial for the design of effective and durable policy responses, and available research in Europe is not yet substantive. We aim to explore citizens' opinions about homelessness and to explain the differences in attitudes within the general population of eight European countries: France, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden., Methods: A nationally representative telephone survey of European citizens was conducted in 2017. Three domains were investigated: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices about homelessness. Based on a multiple correspondence analysis (MCA), a generalized linear model for clustered and weighted samples was used to probe the associations between groups with opposing attitudes., Results: Response rates ranged from 30.4% to 33.5% (N = 5,295). Most respondents (57%) had poor knowledge about homelessness. Respondents who thought the government spent too much on homelessness, people who are homeless should be responsible for housing, people remain homeless by choice, or homelessness keeps capabilities/empowerment intact (regarding meals, family contact, and access to work) clustered together (negative attitudes, 30%). Respondents who were willing to pay taxes, welcomed a shelter, or acknowledged people who are homeless may lack some capabilities (i.e. agreed on discrimination in hiring) made another cluster (positive attitudes, 58%). Respondents living in semi-urban or urban areas (ORs 1.33 and 1.34) and those engaged in practices to support people who are homeless (ORs > 1.4; p<0.005) were more likely to report positive attitudes, whereas those from France and Poland (p<0.001) were less likely to report positive attitudes., Conclusion: The majority of European citizens hold positive attitudes towards people who are homeless, however there remain significant differences between and within countries. Although it is clear that there is strong support for increased government action and more effective solutions for Europe's growing homelessness crisis, there also remain public opinion barriers rooted in enduring negative perceptions., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.