Faith-Based Organizations' Support of Veteran Congregants at Risk for Mental Health Conditions and Suicide: A Qualitative Study of Clergy Experiences in Los Angeles County.

Faith-based organizations (FBOs) are often "gatekeepers" to mental health care for congregants at risk of mental illness and suicide, especially U.S. military Veterans, but data to inform better collaboration are needed. We conducted focus groups with clergy in Los Angeles County to understand the mental health support FBOs provide and barriers to collaboration with the mental healthcare system. Clergy detailed strategies used to support the mental health of Veteran congregants. Barriers included stigma, limits in clergy training, and incomplete knowledge about community and VA mental health resources. Results suggest strategies to improve collaboration between FBOs and the mental healthcare system in Los Angeles County.

Improving Consumer Experiences in Permanent Supportive Housing Co-Located With Health Centers: A Case Study From the Department of Veterans Affairs.

BACKGROUND: Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH), which provides subsidies for independent housing and supportive services, is an evidence-based practice that improves health and housing for homeless experienced persons. Though most PSH is scattered-site, that is, housing dispersed throughout the mainstream rental market, project-based PSH offers housing and supportive services in dedicated facilities with on-site services. In 2013, the Veterans Health Administration (VA) at Greater Los Angeles opened a novel project-based PSH program located on a VA campus. To inform plans to expand project-based PSH at this VA, we examined participants' experiences in this program. We aimed to identify participant characteristics that suggested they were well suited for the planned PSH expansion; to characterize services that participants found valuable in this setting; and to highlight gaps between participants' needs and PSH services provided. METHODS: We performed semi-structured interviews with a convenience sample (n = 24) of participants who had engaged in this project-based PSH program. Interviews asked why participants selected housing on a VA campus and explored valued program characteristics, designs, and services. Using rapid analysis methods, we generated templated summaries of each participant's responses across the domains of our interview guide, then used matrix analyses to identify salient themes across the interviews. KEY FINDINGS: Participants appreciated the ease of access to medical and mental health services; however, as services were assumed to be optimized by virtue of co-location with VA healthcare, their PSH providers often did not link them with non-VA social services as assertively as desired. Many participants raised concerns about building safety and on-site substance use. A lack of participant engagement in program oversight, often leading to conflicts with staff and building management, was also highlighted in our interviews. DISCUSSION: Given the value placed on ease of access to healthcare, these data suggest the value of this PSH model for persons with healthcare vulnerabilities. Specific recommendations for the planned PSH expansion include: (1) continuation of proximate, open-access healthcare; (2) clear tenant policies; (3) tenant councils for each development; (4) staff knowledgeable of non-VA resources and social services; (5) Veteran-preferred hiring practices by Property/Service management; (6) gender-specific accommodations; and (7) robust 24/7 security on-site.