Tag Archives: 3) Did they arrive there logically and in a manner that is appropriate and acceptable to the research question? Why or why not?

Literature Review: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Government-Funded vs. Nonprofit Efforts in Addressing Homelessness

Introduction

This literature review examines 15 peer-reviewed studies to assess the comparative effectiveness of government-funded administrative efforts and nonprofit organizations in aiding individuals experiencing homelessness. The focus is on understanding the methodologies employed, the conclusions drawn, and the logical coherence of these studies in relation to the research question.

1. Effectiveness of Permanent Supportive Housing and Income Assistance Interventions for Homeless Individuals in High-Income Countries: A Systematic Review
Source: The Lancet Public Health
Authors: Baxter et al.
Methodology: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies.
Findings: Permanent supportive housing significantly improves housing stability and reduces homelessness. Income assistance interventions also show positive effects.
Evaluation: The study employs rigorous methods, providing strong evidence for the effectiveness of these interventions.

2. Using Common Themes: Cost-Effectiveness of Permanent Supported Housing for People With Mental Illness
Source: Research on Social Work Practice
Author: Thomas Chalmers McLaughlin
Methodology: Analysis of billing records and service usage data for 268 individuals.
Findings: Supported housing leads to significant cost savings by reducing reliance on emergency services.
Evaluation: The study provides a logical and data-driven argument for the cost-effectiveness of supported housing.

3. Effectiveness of Case Management for Homeless Persons: A Systematic Review
Source: American Journal of Public Health
Authors: Coldwell & Bender
Methodology: Systematic review of studies on case management models.
Findings: Case management improves housing stability and service utilization; effects on substance use and health outcomes are mixed.
Evaluation: The review offers a balanced assessment, acknowledging both strengths and limitations of case management.

4. Pathways Housing First for Homeless Persons with Psychiatric Disabilities: Program Innovation, Research, and Advocacy
Source: Journal of Social Issues
Authors: Greenwood et al.
Methodology: Program evaluation and literature synthesis.
Findings: The Housing First model effectively reduces homelessness among individuals with psychiatric disabilities.
Evaluation: The study presents a well-supported case for the Housing First approach, backed by empirical evidence.

5. Outcomes Associated with Providing Secure, Stable, and Permanent Housing for People Who Have Been Homeless: An International Scoping Review
Source: Journal of Planning Literature
Authors: Carnemolla & Skinner
Methodology: Scoping review of international studies.
Findings: Stable housing leads to reduced emergency service use and improved health outcomes.
Evaluation: The review synthesizes diverse studies to highlight the benefits of permanent housing solutions.

6. Permanent Supportive Housing: Assessing the Evidence
Source: Psychiatric Services
Authors: Rog et al.
Methodology: Review of studies on permanent supportive housing.
Findings: Consistent positive effects on housing stability and reductions in hospital and emergency room use.
Evaluation: The study provides a comprehensive overview, reinforcing the effectiveness of supportive housing.

7. Study Shows Effectiveness of Housing-First Program
Source: Axios