Which Way Home? 29 might prefer to live more communally Conclusion (Tsemberis, 2013). A key argument here is the concern, both among some service providers The international literature raises a number of and among some people who are homeless, is questions relevant to the service mix in Simon that living in ordinary housing might result in Communities. One area of contention is the use of isolation and boredom which can prove communal living arrangements, and this model has challenging when trying to avoid drugs or received mixed views in the international literature. alcohol (Pleace and Bretherton, 2013b). In That said, it is also necessary to note that the Finland, where use of communal housing-led evidence base with regard to communal models of services is widespread, there are those who housing-led services is not extensive. Respondents defend the use of shared apartment blocks in the Simon Communities research were well because of the camaraderie that can exist aware of the dangers inherent in the use of among people with a shared experience of communal models in relation the potential for chronic or long term homelessness (Kaakinen, people who are homeless to become rapidly 2012). entrenched in chronic behaviours. Nevertheless, a l Existing homelessness services, many of which clear message from respondents was also that the were designed as communal shelters, hostels particular context in Ireland suggests a valuable role or supported housing, represent a significant for communal models as one component of a capital investment and significant ‘real estate’. housing-led approach. This message reinforces The potential to re-use these services by previous findings in relation to the preferences of conversion to housing-led models, as some service users for communal models. undertaken in Finland, allows for both a relatively rapid switchover to a housing-led A further issue relates to drawing on learning from approach to chronic or long term international practice with regard to reconfiguring homelessness and may also reduce potential existing emergency and transitional costs. As has been shown, both in this report accommodation, recognising the assets that these and in previous research on housing-led buildings represent. Again, respondents to this services (Pleace and Bretherton, 2013a), a research highlighted two key barriers to be major shortfall in affordable housing supply is a overcome in Simon Communities, particularly in the considerable barrier to a widespread rolling out larger cities: of housing-led services using scattered, ordinary housing across much of the country. l Practical constraints in adapting existing The potential for re-using some existing buildings. This included financial resources homelessness service provision does warrant available; the physical layout of buildings, as some examination. There is also the point that well as ownership and leasing arrangements; the costs of delivering support could be less l How to phase the adoption of housing-led when communal models of housing-led approaches in terms of investing in a models services are used. based on housing-led housing options It is important to be clear what the limitations of a (scattered or communal), compared with communal model of housing-led services actually emergency provision, given the context of the are. It has been noted elsewhere that the staircase current demand from people who are services the original Pathways Housing First homeless. service was designed to replace were not always ideal versions of the staircase model, some were badly resourced and also poorly run (Rosenheck, 2010). It may be that with the correct management, mix of residents and provision of support services that a communal housing-led service can be successful.
Which Way Home?
To see the actual publication please follow the link above