Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
S. Barker, N. Maguire (2017)
Experts by Experience: Peer Support and its Use with the HomelessCommunity Mental Health Journal, 53
J. Keeling, K. Wormer (2012)
Social Worker Interventions in Situations of Domestic Violence: What We Can Learn from Survivors' Personal Narratives?British Journal of Social Work, 42
L. Dixon, J. Turner, N. Krauss, J. Scott, S. McNary (1999)
Case managers' and clients' perspectives on a representative payee program.Psychiatric services, 50 6
D. Padgett, L. Gulcur, S. Tsemberis (2006)
Housing First Services for People Who Are Homeless With Co-Occurring Serious Mental Illness and Substance AbuseResearch on Social Work Practice, 16
Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 14
Mary Hawk, D. Davis (2012)
The effects of a harm reduction housing program on the viral loads of homeless individuals living with HIV/AIDSAIDS Care, 24
D. Padgett, B. Henwood, Courtney Abrams, Andrew Davis (2008)
Engagement and retention in services among formerly homeless adults with co-occurring mental illness and substance abuse: voices from the margins.Psychiatric rehabilitation journal, 31 3
L. Anselm, Strauss, Andrew Cerniglia (2008)
Excerpts from : The Discovery of Grounded Theory : Strategies for Qualitative Research
J. Arnsten, P. Demas, R. Grant, M. Gourevitch, H. Farzadegan, A. Howard, E. Schoenbaum (2002)
Impact of active drug use on antiretroviral therapy adherence and viral suppression in HIV-infected drug users.Journal of General Internal Medicine, 17
Thomas Byrne, J. Fargo, A. Montgomery, Ellen Munley, D. Culhane (2014)
The Relationship between Community Investment in Permanent Supportive Housing and Chronic HomelessnessSocial Service Review, 88
J. Todahl, Deanna Linville, Abby Shamblin, D. Ball (2012)
Client narratives about experiences with a multicouple treatment program for intimate partner violence.Journal of marital and family therapy, 38 Suppl 1
G. Bowpitt, Peter Dwyer, E. Sundin, Mark Weinstein (2011)
The support priorities of multiply excluded homeless people and their compatibility with support agency agendas – new research into multiple exclusion homelessnessHousing, Care and Support, 14
Daniel Kidder, R. Wolitski, S. Royal, Angela Aidala, C. Courtenay-Quirk, David Holtgrave, David Harre, Esther Sumartojo, Ron Stall, for Team (2007)
Access to Housing as a Structural Intervention for Homeless and Unstably Housed People Living with HIV: Rationale, Methods, and Implementation of the Housing and Health StudyAIDS and Behavior, 11
D. Davis, Mary Hawk, J. Marx, A. Hunsaker (2014)
Mechanisms of Adherence in a Harm Reduction Housing ProgramJournal of Social Work Practice in the Addictions, 14
L. Davidson, Chyrell Bellamy, Kimberly Guy, Rebecca Miller (2012)
Peer support among persons with severe mental illnesses: a review of evidence and experienceWorld Psychiatry, 11
M. Harvey, Anne Mondesir, H. Aldrich (2007)
Fostering Resilience in Traumatized CommunitiesJournal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 14
P. Hystad, Richard Carpiano (2010)
Sense of community-belonging and health-behaviour change in CanadaJournal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 66
M. Newell, A. Grimwood, L. Cluver, G. Fatti, L. Sherr (2016)
Children and HIV – a hop (hopefully), a skip (lamentably) and a jump (ideally)?AIDS Care, 28
Uzo Anucha (2005)
"WE ARE NOT JUST RENT RECEIPTS": Housing, Neighbourhood, and Community Re-Imagined by Formerly Homeless People, 22
D. Davis, Mary Hawk, Jamie McLaughlin, Terri Brincko, M. King, Christina Farmartino (2015)
Despite initial "kicking and screaming" unstably housed persons report high satisfaction with representative payee programHousing, Care and Support, 18
N. Mulia, L. Schmidt (2003)
Conflicts and Trade‐Offs due to Alcohol and Drugs: Clients’ Accounts of Leaving WelfareSocial Service Review, 77
Erin Toolis, Phillip Hammack (2015)
The Lived Experience of Homeless Youth: A Narrative Approach, 2
G. Bowpitt, Peter Dwyer, E. Sundin, Mark Weinstein (2014)
Places of Sanctuary for ‘the Undeserving’? Homeless People's Day Centres and the Problem of ConditionalityBritish Journal of Social Work, 44
M. Kushel, Grant Colfax, Kathleen Ragland, A. Heineman, H. Palacio, David Bangsberg (2006)
Case management is associated with improved antiretroviral adherence and CD4+ cell counts in homeless and marginally housed individuals with HIV infection.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 43 2
G. Marlatt, M. Larimer, K. Witkiewitz (2002)
Harm Reduction: Pragmatic Strategies for Managing High-Risk Behaviors
T. Minior, S. Galea, J. Stuber, J. Ahern, D. Ompad (2003)
Racial differences in discrimination experiences and responses among minority substance users.Ethnicity & disease, 13 4
SAMHSA (2008)
Results from the 2007 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: national findings
AIDS Care, 28
A. Strauss (1992)
Basics Of Qualitative Research
P. Clark (2015)
Emerging themes in using narrative in geriatric care: Implications for patient-centered practice and interprofessional teamwork.Journal of aging studies, 34
B. Loneck, S. Banks, B. Way, E. Bonaparte (2002)
An empirical model of therapeutic process for psychiatric emergency room clients with dual disordersSocial Work Research, 26
J. Tetley, G. Grant, S. Davies (2009)
Using Narratives to Understand Older People’s Decision-Making ProcessesQualitative Health Research, 19
Jill Welch, M. Patton (1992)
Qualitative evaluation and research methodsThe Modern Language Journal, 76
C. Rogers (1956)
Becoming a personPastoral Psychology, 7
PurposeEliciting client narratives and creating community-informed interventions have been effective methods of engaging those who are unstably housed in care. Previous studies have shown that these approaches foster client empowerment and provide insight as to the importance of creating community-driven solutions. However, few studies report the impact of these methods on homeless people living with HIV. The purpose of this paper is to describe methods used to engage consumers in sharing their stories, including formative focus groups, qualitative interviews, and feedback from peer staff.Design/methodology/approachData for the case study were derived from program notes, board minutes, and feedback from founding board members of The Open Door. Two researchers who were involved with the program from its inception reviewed these data and then developed a schematic of the methods used to develop and inform the program itself. The authors determined that three methods were used to elicit client and community narratives to inform program decisions. These include a formative focus group that helped to structure and implement the program in its earliest stages; qualitative interviews, which helped to pinpoint effective program components and enabled the rapid expansion of the service delivery model; and feedback from peer staff, which has consistently allowed for the refinement and prioritization of services. Data were collected for the purposes of program development and improvement but since qualitative interviews were conducted by faculty affiliated with an academic institution, the institutional review board of that institution was consulted and the qualitative interviews were determined to be exempt from review.FindingsThe focus group informed the authors that they wanted to live in their own apartments but have on-site supports. They also indicated that traditional housing program rules such as abstinence were too restrictive for them to navigate. In the qualitative interviews, the clients reported an increased sense of community with peers and peer staff members, which helped to reduce stigma. Second, residents reported that supportive services helped them to connect to and maintain in HIV clinical care. Third, residents reported that the representative payee services were a key factor in helping them improve housing and financial stability.Research limitations/implicationsThere are a number of limitations to this case study that demand the need for caution in interpreting results. Although the authors used several different methods to elicit client narratives and community feedback, sample sizes were small, control groups were not utilized, and data were specific to individuals receiving services through one housing program. Thus, results are not generalizable. In addition, the methods reported herein mix those conducted for the purposes of research (in-depth qualitative interviews) with others conducted specifically to inform program delivery and improvement (focus group and peer staff feedback). Thus, rigor is not equally applied across all methods. In addition, the individuals conducting research and authoring this paper were directly involved with the creation of the program and ongoing service delivery. Therefore, interviewer and reporting bias also present threats to validity.Practical implicationsThere are many strengths involved in utilizing the narrative feedback of the residents and peer staff to inform the practice. One is that this method is an incredibly cost-efficient way to assess client and program needs to inform intervention development and improvement. The results are also very transparent and easily translatable to the agency’s everyday work. These methods are practical in both their approach to clients and their ability to be easily incorporated into the daily work of clients and staff. These methods allow for rapid application as results are immediate and feedback can be implemented quickly.Social implicationsWhen seeking client and staff feedback, it is important to be cognizant of believing the client and recognizing that all people have their own personal perspectives, including their own version of the “truth.” Eliciting this type of feedback puts individuals in a vulnerable place, so it is critical to guarantee their safety. All information solicited must be regarded in a positive light to inform improved service delivery and not as a means to receive information that “tells on” clients or peer staff. Feedback should be reviewed as an opportunity for learning and not as a mechanism for retaliation.Originality/valueThe clients and staff have been significantly marginalized in the society. It is possible that having providers be kind and respectful to them and asking for their opinions is a very new experience which might make them feel grateful and more likely to be favorable in their responses. Clients may feel loyal to the program and be much more likely to speak of it positively. Regardless of these potential biases, the quantitative results of improved health outcomes published elsewhere indicate that the clients may not just be being nice, but may in fact be receiving interventions that are working.
Housing Care and Support – Emerald Publishing
Published: Dec 18, 2017
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.