Act Three: Life after transitional housing for homeless families

This is the final of a three-part series, Homelessness Research in Three Acts, highlighting brand new research on homelessness. Today's posting covers a recent HUD-funded study called Life After Transitional Housing for Homeless Families. The study examines whether transitional housing makes a difference in the lives of the families it serves and whether it is more effective for some homeless people than others. This study, conducted by Martha Burt of The Urban Institute, followed 179 families in 36 transitional housing (TH) programs within five communities for one year after leaving the program.

Here are some key findings:

• Longer stays in TH were associated with higher levels of educational attainment and employment at moveout and greater likelihood of continued employment during the follow-up period.
• Having a rent subsidy at TH departure was crucial for two outcomes: having one’s own place at TH exit and limiting movement of members in and out of the household.
• Most family “graduates” of transitional housing maintained housing stability for the first year after departure from transitional housing.
• At program graduation, 21 percent of mothers said they had been treated for alcohol abuse and 65 percent said they had been treated for drug abuse. A small percentage reported drinking or drug use in the year following transitional housing.
• Transitional housing programs contributed to family reunification - 42 percent of children not living with the mother when she entered TH rejoined the family during her stay.
  

Interestingly, this study was released by HUD at the same time as the study on the costs of first-time homelessness covered in Act Two of this series. That study identified transitional housing as relatively high-cost option in serving homeless families and recommended avoiding its use for families who primarily need permanent housing (and what homeless family doesn't?) Taken together, the studies covered in Act Two and Three seem to suggest that there are two choices when serving the homeless - fund the cheapest program or the programs that demonstrate effectiveness. Perhaps a better plan would be to provide adequate funding for a continuum of housing that meets various needs and includes shelters, transitional housing, permanent supportive housing and affordable housing rental subsidies. That way, we are not placing people who do not need services in high-cost programs, yet the programs are there for those who do need them.