Evaluation of Secondhand Smoke Exposure in New York City Public Housing After Implementation of the 2018 Federal Smoke-Free Housing Policy.

Importance: Secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure is associated with many health conditions in children and adults. Millions of individuals in the US are currently exposed to SHS in their homes. Objective: To investigate whether a federal ban on smoking in public housing settings was associated with a decrease in indoor SHS levels in New York City public housing developments 12 months after the policy's implementation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study tracked indoor air quality longitudinally from April 2018 to September 2019 and used difference-in-differences analysis to examine SHS exposure before vs after implementation of the 2018 federal smoke-free housing (SFH) policy in 10 New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) buildings vs 11 matched low-income buildings not subject to the SFH policy (ie, Section 8 buildings). Exposures: Federal SFH policy implementation, beginning July 30, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Comparison of nicotine concentration levels from passive, bisulfate-coated filters before vs 12 months after implementation of the federal SFH policy. Secondary outcomes included changes in particulate matter less than 2.5 µm in diameter, measured with low-cost particle monitors, and counts of cigarette butts in common areas. Results: Air quality was measured repeatedly in a total of 153 NYCHA and 110 Section 8 nonsmoking households as well as in 91 stairwells and hallways. Before the SFH policy implementation, air nicotine was detectable in 19 of 20 stairwells (95.0%) in NYCHA buildings and 15 of 19 stairwells (78.9%) in Section 8 buildings (P = .19) and in 17 of 19 hallways (89.5%) in NYCHA buildings and 14 of 23 hallways (60.9%) in Section 8 buildings (P = .004). Nicotine was detected less frequently inside nonsmoking apartments overall (26 of 263 [9.9%]) but more frequently in NYCHA apartments (20 of 153 [13.1%]) than in Section 8 apartments (6 of 110 [5.5%]) (P = .04). One year after policy implementation, there was no differential change over time in nicotine concentrations measured in stairwells (DID, 0.03 µg/m3; 95% CI, -0.99 to 1.06 µg/m3) or inside nonsmoking households (DID, -0.04 µg/m3; 95% CI, -0.24 to 0.15 µg/m3). Larger decreases in nicotine concentration were found in NYCHA hallways than in Section 8 hallways (DID, -0.43 µg/m3; 95% CI, -1.26 to 0.40 µg/m3). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings suggest that there was no differential change in SHS in NYCHA buildings 12 months after SFH policy implementation. Additional support may be needed to ensure adherence to SFH policies.

Quantifying the Restrictiveness of Local Housing Authority Policies Toward People With Criminal Justice Histories: United States, 2009-2018.

Objectives. To quantify variation in the restrictiveness of local public housing authority policies related to the admission and eviction of people with criminal justice histories.Methods. We conducted content analysis of housing authority policy documents for US cities with a population of 100 000 or more (n = 152). Factor analysis identified policy provisions to create a restrictiveness score (range = 0-8). We explored associations between restrictiveness scores and city-level measures of racial/ethnic diversity, racial/ethnic neighborhood segregation, ideology, and public housing scarcity.Results. Eight policy provisions, 6 relating to consideration of mitigating circumstances, explained 71.0% of the variance in housing authority policy provisions related to criminal justice histories. We observed small but significant positive associations between restrictiveness scores and racial/ethnic diversity (r = 0.22) and neighborhood segregation (r = 0.18). There was no correlation between restrictiveness scores of housing authorities within the same state (intraclass correlation = 0.0002).Conclusions. Housing authority policies vary substantially regarding the circumstances under which people with criminal justice histories can obtain and retain public housing. Exposure to constellations of policy provisions that might institutionalize health inequities and increase health risk among people with criminal justice histories can be quantified through a systematic process.

Our Homes, Our Health: Strategies, Insight, and Resources to Support Smoke-Free Multiunit Housing.

Tobacco use remains the single most preventable cause of disease, disability, and death in the United States. Almost 500,000 people die every year in the United States because of tobacco use; approximately one in eight of those deaths are attributable to secondhand smoke exposure. Significant disparities exist in terms of which groups bear the greatest burden of tobacco-related illness and mortality. Reducing tobacco use and exposure in groups most affected and most at risk is a national public health priority. Tobacco control advocates can promote health equity by prioritizing policies that are likely to decrease tobacco use and secondhand smoke exposure and improve access to tobacco cessation resources among populations most at risk for tobacco-related disparities, including people who live in subsidized multiunit housing. In this article, we share the context, process, key milestones, and lessons learned as stakeholders in El Paso, Texas explored and implemented smoke-free policy in subsidized public housing. Partners including the local housing authority, a nonprofit health foundation, the local public health department, and a local university facilitated a thoughtful and community-engaged process that acknowledged the right of residents to breathe clean air in their own homes, potential challenges residents who choose to smoke may face in adapting to smoke-free policy, and the need for support for those who choose to quit. We conclude with five key lessons learned and share resources for other communities, health professionals, and coalitions advocating for and supporting smoke-free housing policy in their communities.

Homeless and Helpless: How the United States has Failed Those With Severe and Persistent Mental Illness.

The United States has failed its citizens who suffer from severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI). Homelessness is one of the most obvious manifestations of this failure. The combination of a lack of effective treatment, inadequate entitlement programs such as Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), and subpar housing options form systemic barriers that prevent people suffering from mental illness from being able to obtain adequate housing. Cultural beliefs within the United States regarding who is homeless and what homelessness means also play a significant role in the development of positively impactful social welfare programs. Part II of this Note reviews the history of treatment for persons with SPMI--specifically how that treatment has evolved, the history of federal policies regarding SSI, SSDI and housing, and societal beliefs regarding homelessness and mental illness that have impacted policymaking decisions. Part III looks at these same areas from a current perspective and addresses the current issues and some possible solutions. Part IV discusses how lack of effective treatment, poor disability programs, and the need for better housing options work together to form systemic barriers for people with SPMI. Part IV also address how the cultural beliefs in the United States regarding people who have SPMI and are homeless serve as an independent barrier to policy change. Ultimately, this Note argues that homelessness is a product of system failures rather than individual factors.

A protocol for measuring the impact of a smoke-free housing policy on indoor tobacco smoke exposure.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco remains a leading cause of preventable death in the U.S., responsible for more than 440,000 deaths each year. Approximately 10% of these deaths are attributable to exposure of non-smokers to secondhand smoke (SHS). Residents living in public multi-unit housing (MUH) are at excess risk for SHS exposure compared to the general population. On November 30, 2016, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) passed a rule requiring all public housing agencies to implement smoke-free housing (SFH) policies in their housing developments by July 30, 2018. METHODS: As part of a larger natural experiment study, we designed a protocol to evaluate indoor SHS levels before and after policy implementation through collection of repeat indoor air samples in non-smoking apartments and common areas of select high-rise NYCHA buildings subject to the HUD SFH rule, and also from socio-demographically matched private-sector high-rise control buildings not subject to the rule. A baseline telephone survey was conducted in all selected buildings to facilitate rapid recruitment into the longitudinal study and assess smoking prevalence, behaviors, and attitudes regarding the SFH policy prior to implementation. Data collection began in early 2018 and will continue through 2021. DISCUSSION: The baseline survey was completed by 559 NYCHA residents and 471 comparison building residents (response rates, 35, and 32%, respectively). Smoking prevalence was comparable between study arms (15.7% among NYCHA residents and 15.2% among comparison residents). The majority of residents reported supporting a building-wide smoke-free policy (63.0 and 59.9%, respectively). We enrolled 157 NYCHA and 118 comparison non-smoking households into the longitudinal air monitoring study and performed air monitoring in common areas. Follow up surveys and air monitoring in participant households occur every 6 months for 2.5 years. Capitalizing on the opportunity of this federal policy rollout, the large and diverse public housing population in NYC, and robust municipal data sources, this study offers a unique opportunity to evaluate the policy's direct impacts on SHS exposure. Methods in this protocol can inform similar SFH policy evaluations elsewhere.

Implementation and enforcement of smoke-free policies in public housing.

Smoke-free policies such as those required by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development have the potential to reduce persistent income-related disparities in secondhand smoke exposure. To understand the implementation and enforcement process, as well as barriers and facilitators to compliance and enforcement, we conducted semi-structured interviews (n=37) with representatives from 23 Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) with some level of smoking restriction in place, along with residents from 14 of these PHAs, from January to August 2016. Residents were typically notified of the new policy through group meetings, new resident orientations and/or one-on-one discussions during lease renewal or annual recertification. Timing of implementation varied, with advanced notice of 6 months or a year most common. Enforcement typically involved a series of verbal and/or written warnings, followed by written notice of lease violation, and eventual notice of lease termination and/or eviction. Challenges in enforcement were generally classified as monitoring difficulties or legal concerns. Characterizing current practices (e.g. advance notice, clear communication of escalating consequences, cessation support and concrete evidence of violation) from early adopters sets the stage for identifying best practices and helps to ensure successful and fair implementation of smoke-free policies in subsidized housing.

Trends in Homeless Children and Young Adults Seeking Shelter in a Boston Pediatric Emergency Department Following State Housing Policy Changes, 2011-2016.

OBJECTIVES: To describe a trend in emergency department (ED) use by homeless children and young adults before and after a state housing policy change in 2012 and to quantify financial and time costs to the health care system. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed de-identified electronic medical records of homeless children and young adults aged 0 to 21 years seeking shelter at an urban tertiary pediatric ED in Boston, Massachusetts, between September 1, 2011, and August 31, 2016. RESULTS: We identified 1078 visits for homelessness by 916 children and young adults. The median number of visits per month increased from 3 before the policy change to 17 after (P < .001). The total hospital charges were $578 351, with a net payment of $214 231, 97% paid by Medicaid. The average length of stay was 8 hours, totaling more than 8500 hours of occupancy. CONCLUSIONS: The number of homeless children and young adults who visited a pediatric ED increased significantly following a housing policy change, leading to substantial resource burdens on the ED and Medicaid. Public Health Implications. Policymakers should consider potential health care costs when designing housing policies and consider investing in housing to prevent unnecessary ED visits.

Smoking Policy Change Within Permanent Supportive Housing.

Smoke-free policies effectively reduce secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure among non-smokers, and reduce consumption, encourage quit attempts, and minimize relapse to smoking among smokers. Such policies are uncommon in permanent supportive housing (PSH) for formerly homeless individuals. In this study, we collaborated with a PSH provider in San Diego, California to assess a smoke-free policy that restricted indoor smoking. Between August and November 2015, residents completed a pre-policy questionnaire on attitudes toward smoke-free policies and exposure to secondhand smoke, and then 7-9 months after policy implementation residents were re-surveyed. At follow-up, there was a 59.7% reduction in indoor smoking. The proportion of residents who identified as current smokers reduced by 13% (95% CI: -38, 10.2). The proportion of residents who reported never smelling SHS indoors (apartment 24.2%, 95% CI: 4.2, 44.1; shared areas 17.2%, 95% CI: 1.7, 32.7); in outdoor areas next to the living unit (porches or patio 56.7%, 95% CI: 40.7, 72.8); and in other outdoor areas (parking lot 28.6%, 95% CI: 8.3, 48.9) was lower post-policy compared with pre-policy. Overall, resident support increased by 18.7%; however, the greatest increase in support occurred among current smokers (from 14.8 to 37.5%). Fewer current smokers reported that the policy would enable cessation at post-policy compared to pre-policy. Our findings demonstrate the feasibility of implementing smoke-free policies in PSH for formerly homeless adults. However, policy alone appears insufficient to trigger change in smoking behavior, highlighting the need for additional cessation resources to facilitate quitting.

The homeless pregnant woman.

Women who are pregnant and homeless constitute a unique group at significant risk of adverse foetal and maternal outcomes. Despite this heightened risk profile, social housing support to this group of women is less than satisfactory. Concerted effort and more collaborative working is needed by all who provide social, and healthcare services to homeless pregnant women, to improve the lot of these women. Clear definitions and legislative provisions in respect of the homeless will go a long way in reducing ambiguity and close loopholes which currently act to deny the homeless pregnant woman social housing support at a time when it is most needed.

Health, Secondhand Smoke Exposure, and Smoking Behavior Impacts of No-Smoking Policies in Public Housing, Colorado, 2014-2015.

INTRODUCTION: Exposure to secondhand smoke is problematic for residents living in multiunit housing, as the smoke migrates through shared ventilation systems, unsealed cracks, and door spaces. The objective of our research was to assess resident exposure to secondhand smoke, support for no-smoking policies, and the health impacts of no-smoking policies in multiunit housing. METHODS: Surveys of 312 heads of households who resided in 1 of 3 multiunit buildings managed by a Colorado public housing authority were administered before and after implementation of a no-smoking policy that prohibited smoking in all resident apartments and all indoor common areas. A matched-pairs analysis of initial surveys and 15-month post-policy implementation surveys for 115 respondents was conducted. RESULTS: Decreases were found in the number and percentage of smokers who smoked every day and the number of cigarettes smoked per day, and 30% had quit smoking 15 months after policy implementation. The percentage of residents who smelled secondhand smoke indoors declined significantly. A significant decrease in breathing problems was found after policy implementation. Although decreases were found in the incidence of asthma attacks, emphysema/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, eye irritation, colds, nasal congestion, and ear/sinus infections, these decreases were not significant. CONCLUSION: Consistent findings across nearly all variables tested suggest that no-smoking policies reduce resident exposure to secondhand smoke, lower the incidence of secondhand smoke-associated breathing problems, decrease daily smoking and cigarette consumption, encourage smoking cessation, and increase quit attempts. If implemented in all multiunit housing, these policies could reduce exposure to secondhand smoke and health problems associated with secondhand smoke, promote smoking cessation, and reduce cigarette consumption.

The Experience With Smoke-Free Policies in Affordable Multiunit Housing in North Carolina: A Statewide Survey.

PURPOSE: Previous surveys of housing operators have identified concerns about enforcement, legal issues, and loss of market share as the main barriers to implementing smoke-free policies in multiunit housing. The purpose of this study was to examine enforcement practices as well as economic and legal outcomes in smoke-free affordable multiunit housing. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: Affordable multiunit housing in North Carolina. SUBJECTS: Affordable multiunit housing properties (n = 1063, 57% response rate). MEASURES: Property representatives completed a written survey with questions regarding the existence of smoke-free policies, smoke-free policy implementation and enforcement practices, and smoking-related costs. ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics, χ(2) goodness-of-fit test, and t-test. RESULTS: A total of 16.5% of properties had policies that prohibited smoking in all residential units. Half (49.8%) of smoke-free properties reported no violations to their policies in the past 12 months. Legal actions to enforce policies were rarely needed and were successful when they did occur. Compared to smoking-allowed properties, smoke-free properties did not experience a loss of market share in terms of occupancy rate (t = .09; p = .93) or residents moving away (χ(2) =. 5; p = .48). CONCLUSION: Housing operators' concerns about enforcement, legal issues, and loss of market share associated with smoke-free policies are largely unfounded among affordable housing properties in North Carolina. Public health professionals should use messaging strategies that refute these concerns to encourage more properties to adopt smoke-free policies.

State Tobacco Control Program Implementation Strategies for Smoke-Free Multiunit Housing.

Multiunit housing residents are at risk of secondhand smoke exposure from adjoining units and common areas. We developed this case study to document state-level strategies undertaken to address this risk. We explored program documents to identify facilitators, barriers, and outcomes. Three states (Montana, Michigan, and Nebraska) provided detailed information on multiunit housing efforts in the study time frame. We conducted a qualitative analysis using inductive coding to develop themes. Several facilitators relating to existing infrastructure included traditional and nontraditional partnerships, leadership and champions, collecting and using data, efficient use of resources, and strategic plans. We also report external catalysts, barriers, and outcomes. Significant state leadership and effort were required to provide local-level technical assistance to engage traditional and nontraditional partners. Information needs were identified and varied by stakeholder type (i.e., health vs. housing). States recommend starting with public housing authorities, so they can become resources for affordable and subsidized housing. These lessons and resources can be used to inform smoke-free multiunit housing initiatives in other states and localities.

Housing Relocation Policy and Violence: A Literature Review.

This article summarizes and reviews the cross-discipline literature on violent crime in destination neighborhoods postrelocation in order to build a more comprehensive picture of risk factors for violence, as well as how and why housing policies influence risk of violence. High rates of violent crime continue to be a persistent problem in areas of concentrated poverty and public housing. Modern housing programs such as Moving to Opportunity and Housing Opportunities for People Everywhere are popular interventions for reducing the density of low-income people receiving public housing assistance by relocating residents of distressed housing projects. However, evidence suggests that relocated residents may not experience less violence or improved safety in their new communities.