Addressing Mental Health Problems through Housing Interventions

Studies have shown that people who rent their residences for extended periods are more likely to experience depression than those who own homes. The housing-mental health dynamic has received significant attention as researchers explore the mental health impacts of housing instability. For low-income families who cannot access and maintain stable housing, the risk of experiencing depression goes up significantly.

Owning a home is more than a symbol of financial stability. It is security, an asset, and a sign of confidence. Unfortunately, home ownership is out of reach for a growing number of Americans from economically challenged areas. For people with children, the effects of housing instability are even more profound. In addition to family-wide vulnerability and mental health problems, children may have poor cognitive outcomes or experience developmental delays.

Homelessness-related risks explain why housing is the primary area of focus of most intervention programs. Housing is a public health issue. Unstable living conditions have been linked to higher treatment costs due to the overuse of emergency services. Therefore, while providing affordable housing may seem expensive at first, additional societal costs may be costlier in the long run.

There are numerous programs geared toward ending homelessness and associated social and health problems. One such program is Housing First. It targets people from extremely low-income backgrounds with chronic mental health challenges or physical disabilities. Such people have been found to have recurring high healthcare and community-program costs. Housing First provides permanent housing services and sets up participants for financial stability through employment support and access to disability income.

The impact of supportive housing on individuals and communities is evidenced by one Los Angeles-based pilot study. The intervention targeted individuals from extremely low-income backgrounds, providing housing and enhanced access to healthcare. It resulted in healthcare cost reduction per participant by an average of $59,415. Despite the overwhelming evidence of the effectiveness of housing-focused programs, lack of funding has hampered the initiative's replication.

Housing First has succeeded where other programs have failed because it focuses on beneficiaries’ stability beyond housing placement. Rather than just providing affordable housing and moving on to other groups in need, the model offers a range of support structures to empower people to take control of their lives.

Areas of focus include medical care, education, coaching, and employment support. Those with chronic medical conditions can access various corrective interventions, including mental health treatment and addiction therapy.

In addition to the stability-focused intervention, the program seeks to cultivate patient autonomy. Patient autonomy is based on the idea that people tend to seek-out treatment once they have a stable living situation. The approach signifies a fundamental change in the approach to the housing-mental health dynamic, whereby participation in treatment is not a prerequisite for housing placement.

Renting a home is not necessarily the problem. It is housing insecurity that exposes renters to mental health problems. For people without a place to call home, the risk of depression goes up significantly. A home is more than shelter. It gives one a sense of security and peace of mind. With increased focus on housing people from low-income backgrounds we can combat some of the pre-existing mental health conditions. Such interventions have been found to improve beneficiaries’ health outcomes and reduce healthcare and community costs.