Client satisfaction with a new group-based model of case management for supported housing services

Jack Tsai, Navin Reddy and Robert A. Rosenheck

Evaluation and Program Planning, 2014, vol. 43, issue C, 118-123

Abstract: Supportive housing typically offers rental subsidies and individual intensive community-based case management and has become a predominant service model for homeless adults. Alternative case management models have not been adequately explored. This study evaluates satisfaction with a novel group-intensive peer support (GIPS) model of case management for the Housing and Urban Development-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) program. A total of 95 HUD-VASH clients rated their satisfaction with services and responded to open-ended questions about what they liked best and least about the program. Quantitative and qualitative analyses compared clients who attended groups as part of the GIPS model and those who did not. No significant difference in satisfaction between group and non-group attenders were found. Clients reported what they liked best about the program was the staff; those who attended groups reported what they liked best was the social interaction and peer support. These findings suggest clients who attend groups for their primary source of case management may be as satisfied as those who receive only individual case management. GIPS offers a feasible and acceptable service model and should be further explored along with other alternative models of care in supportive housing services.

Keywords: Homelessness; Veterans; Case management; Service satisfaction (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2014
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718913001080
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:epplan:v:43:y:2014:i:c:p:118-123

DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.12.004

Access Statistics for this article

Evaluation and Program Planning is currently edited by Jonathan A. Morell

More articles in Evaluation and Program Planning from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().