Recovery residences for homeless people with substance use disorders is an emerging solution to a cyclical problem. Homeless individuals may have difficulty obtaining secure housing and in turn, lack of housing acts as a barrier to sobriety.
Recovery residences for homeless people with substance use disorders is an emerging solution to a cyclical problem. Homeless individuals may have difficulty obtaining secure housing and in turn, lack of housing acts as a barrier to sobriety.
l
With a focus on affordable units and social support, supportive housing creates an environment crucial for helping homeless individuals achieve sobriety and prevent relapse. Services offered by such facilities include job training, childcare services, case management, counseling, and crisis intervention.
Collard and colleagues studied the efficacy of recovery residences in terms of length of sobriety, levels of abstinence self-efficacy (the belief that one is capable of achieving an outcome) and rates of employment by comparing individuals who do and do not live in recovery residences (N= 103). Participants were required to be sober and have lived in the same housing for at least three months.
Below, the table describes the three housing situations in which participants resided:
The study population represents low-income adults in recovery in Atlanta, Georgia. Almost 90% were African American, three quarters were male, and over three quarters had an income at or below $12,000 per year. Over half had a history of using multiple substances (mostly cocaine and alcohol).
There were significantly higher rates of employment at Darmouth House than the alternative housing situations. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of self-efficacy.
With socioeconomic factors working against homeless individuals, it can be difficult to emerge from the cycle of homelessness and addiction.
While this study is not representative of the general homeless population, in metropolitan areas similar to Atlanta, the availability of these facilities could positively impact the recovery process of such individuals.
This study highlights an important issue and introduces a resource that could be of critical benefit to homeless individuals with substance use disorder.
This study is a critical first step in evaluating the benefit of supportive housing, but longitudinal studies, and ideally experimental ones, are needed to observe change over time for participants living in recovery residences compared to standard housing.
Collard, C. S., Lewinson, T., & Watkins, K. (2014). Supportive housing: an evidence-based intervention for reducing relapse among low income adults in addiction recovery. Journal of evidence-based social work, 11(5), 468-479.
l
With a focus on affordable units and social support, supportive housing creates an environment crucial for helping homeless individuals achieve sobriety and prevent relapse. Services offered by such facilities include job training, childcare services, case management, counseling, and crisis intervention.
Collard and colleagues studied the efficacy of recovery residences in terms of length of sobriety, levels of abstinence self-efficacy (the belief that one is capable of achieving an outcome) and rates of employment by comparing individuals who do and do not live in recovery residences (N= 103). Participants were required to be sober and have lived in the same housing for at least three months.
Below, the table describes the three housing situations in which participants resided:
The study population represents low-income adults in recovery in Atlanta, Georgia. Almost 90% were African American, three quarters were male, and over three quarters had an income at or below $12,000 per year. Over half had a history of using multiple substances (mostly cocaine and alcohol).
There were significantly higher rates of employment at Darmouth House than the alternative housing situations. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of self-efficacy.
With socioeconomic factors working against homeless individuals, it can be difficult to emerge from the cycle of homelessness and addiction.
While this study is not representative of the general homeless population, in metropolitan areas similar to Atlanta, the availability of these facilities could positively impact the recovery process of such individuals.
This study highlights an important issue and introduces a resource that could be of critical benefit to homeless individuals with substance use disorder.
This study is a critical first step in evaluating the benefit of supportive housing, but longitudinal studies, and ideally experimental ones, are needed to observe change over time for participants living in recovery residences compared to standard housing.
Collard, C. S., Lewinson, T., & Watkins, K. (2014). Supportive housing: an evidence-based intervention for reducing relapse among low income adults in addiction recovery. Journal of evidence-based social work, 11(5), 468-479.
l
With a focus on affordable units and social support, supportive housing creates an environment crucial for helping homeless individuals achieve sobriety and prevent relapse. Services offered by such facilities include job training, childcare services, case management, counseling, and crisis intervention.
Collard and colleagues studied the efficacy of recovery residences in terms of length of sobriety, levels of abstinence self-efficacy (the belief that one is capable of achieving an outcome) and rates of employment by comparing individuals who do and do not live in recovery residences (N= 103). Participants were required to be sober and have lived in the same housing for at least three months.
Below, the table describes the three housing situations in which participants resided:
The study population represents low-income adults in recovery in Atlanta, Georgia. Almost 90% were African American, three quarters were male, and over three quarters had an income at or below $12,000 per year. Over half had a history of using multiple substances (mostly cocaine and alcohol).
There were significantly higher rates of employment at Darmouth House than the alternative housing situations. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of self-efficacy.
With socioeconomic factors working against homeless individuals, it can be difficult to emerge from the cycle of homelessness and addiction.
While this study is not representative of the general homeless population, in metropolitan areas similar to Atlanta, the availability of these facilities could positively impact the recovery process of such individuals.
This study highlights an important issue and introduces a resource that could be of critical benefit to homeless individuals with substance use disorder.
This study is a critical first step in evaluating the benefit of supportive housing, but longitudinal studies, and ideally experimental ones, are needed to observe change over time for participants living in recovery residences compared to standard housing.
Collard, C. S., Lewinson, T., & Watkins, K. (2014). Supportive housing: an evidence-based intervention for reducing relapse among low income adults in addiction recovery. Journal of evidence-based social work, 11(5), 468-479.
SIGN UP FOR THE BULLETIN
