RESUMO
The article reports empirical outcomes of an ongoing transdisciplinary participatory community action research project that implements behavioral activation in homeless shelters. The overall goal of this Project is twofold: (1) to improve psychosocial functioning of shelter residents and enhance their opportunities to overcome homelessness; and (2) to enhance civic development of service-learning students who assist in Project implementation. Two studies are reported, representing these goals. Study 1 found that residents of a men's shelter (n = 892), women's shelter (n = 433), and transitional housing (n = 40) perceived behavioral activation sessions as immediately beneficial (i.e., important, meaningful, worthy of repeating, and enjoyable), and over the course of shelter stay, they perceived behavioral activation as contributing to their hope, empowerment/self-sufficiency, quality of life, purpose/meaning in life, wellbeing, social support, shelter social climate, and relationships with staff. Quantitative findings are supported by qualitative data (comments by residents on forms). Study 2, which replicates and extends past research on civic-development in service-learning students, used a new quasi-experimental design to compare service-learning students (n = 41) in an interdisciplinary course on homelessness versus non-service-learning students (n = 16) in a psychology course. Service-learning students showed pre- to post-semester improvements in community service self-efficacy, decreases in stigmatizing attitudes, and increases in awareness of privilege and oppression, but students not engaged in service-learning did not show these civic-related changes. These quantitative results are supported by qualitative data (written reflections by students). Results and implications are discussed within the context of the concept of psychopolitical validity.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Though disability and housing instability are discussed separately in public health literature, few studies address families at their intersection. As a result, little is known about families who experience both homelessness and disability, how many receive disability benefits like SSI and SSDI, or the influence of those benefits on health-promoting outcomes like housing stability and self-sufficiency. Moreover, no previous research compares the ability of different housing and service interventions to increase disability benefit access. OBJECTIVE: We examine relationships between disabilities and SSI/SSDI income reported when families enter emergency shelters and later health-promoting outcomes (housing stability and self-sufficiency) and how housing interventions affect SSI/SSDI receipt. METHODS: Families in the (name removed) Study (N = 1857) were interviewed in emergency shelters, randomly offered of one of three housing interventions or usual care (i.e., no immediate referral to any intervention beyond shelter), and re-interviewed 20 months later. RESULTS: A third of families reported a disability at shelter entry. SSI/SSDI coverage of these families increased nearly 10% points over 20 months but never exceeded 40%. Disabilities predicted greater housing instability, food insecurity, and economic stress and less work and income. Among families reporting disabilities, SSI/SSDI receipt predicted fewer returns to emergency shelter, and more income despite less work. Offers of long-term housing subsidies increased SSI/SSDI receipt. CONCLUSIONS: Many families experiencing homelessness have disabilities; those receiving SSI/SSDI benefits have better housing and income outcomes. Providing families experiencing homelessness with long-term housing subsidies and SSI/SSDI could improve public health.
