Submitted by user on
Study Name
Community-Based Rapid Rehousing (CBRR)
Study Sharepoint ID
25295.05
Evaluation name
Family Options Study
Intervention (standard name)
Strength of Evidence Tag
Reason for the Rating

This study received a high study quality rating because it is a low-attrition randomized controlled trial with no known issues that suggest the findings cannot be attributed to the intervention.

This study received a high study quality rating because it is a low-attrition randomized controlled trial with no known issues that suggest the findings cannot be attributed to the intervention.

Populations targeted
Settings in which the intervention was studied

Subgroups

Subgroup data - Female
No
Subgroup data - Male
No
Subgroup data - White
No
Subgroup data - Black
No
Percent homeless
100.00
Percent female
92.50
Percent Male
7.50
Percent No high school diploma or GED
34.00
Percent With a high school diploma or GED
66.00
Percent Married
25.00
Percent Parents
100.00
Percent Employed
19.50
Percent Unemployed
80.50
Percent Black or African American
46.50
Percent Hispanic or Latino of any race
20.00
Percent White not Hispanic
19.00
Percent unknown race
15.00
Mean age
30.90
Group formation formatted

After a family with at least one child age 15 or younger had remained in an emergency homeless shelter for seven days, the evaluation team randomly assigned them to the one of four possible intervention conditions. This review focuses on assignment to CBRR versus usual care. Although the evaluation team intended to randomly assign families to all intervention conditions with an equal probability, availability of slots, site-level implementation limitations, and unique eligibility requirements for families resulted in most families being randomly assigned to a restricted set of intervention conditions (474 of 2,282 families were randomly assigned across all four intervention options; most families—1,544—had three options available to them). This resulted in differing probabilities of assignment, depending on which set of interventions was available to each family. Before random assignment, the evaluation team gathered informed consent, determined eligibility for available intervention slots, and conducted a baseline survey. Pairwise contrasts (in this review, CBRR relative to usual care) were only estimated on the sample of families who were eligible for both intervention conditions and randomized to one of them.

Study timing formatted

September 2010 to December 2014

Study funding formatted

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research

Sample Characteristics

The following characteristics applied to participants who were eligible for both the CBRR and usual care intervention conditions, and who were assigned to either: the average age of the head of household was about 31 at baseline, and 93 percent were female. About 47 percent were Black, 20 percent were Hispanic or Latino, 19 percent were White, non-Hispanic, and 15 percent were another race or multiple races or ethnicities. Twenty-five percent of eligible families were headed by married parents, and all families had at least one child younger than 15 at baseline. Thirty-four percent of the baseline sample heads of household had no high school diploma or GED, and only 20 percent were employed at baseline.

Implementing organization formatted

Community-based nonprofit agencies and city government agencies

Program history

CBRR used funding from the rapid rehousing component of the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program. Funding for this program was first included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

Treatment condition formatted

After spending at least seven days in an emergency homeless shelter, families with at least one child age 15 or younger were assigned to CBRR to receive time-limited rental assistance and support services to help locate housing. They also received case management referrals to coordinate other services. CBRR typically provided about 7 to 8 months of rental assistance to help families afford stable housing, but families could receive assistance for up to 18 months. CBRR programs were encouraged to provide rental assistance as rapidly as possible. As a result, these programs conducted recertification every three months to assess families' needs and ability to continue to meet housing choice voucher eligibility standards. Most CBRR participants (84 percent) received supportive services to assist with upfront costs (for example, security deposits or moving costs). CBRR programs also provided limited case management services that linked participants to supports for increasing self-sufficiency (for example, financial education or public benefits). Case managers also helped with the housing search and placement assistance.

Comparison condition formatted

After spending at least seven days in an emergency homeless shelter, families with at least one child age 15 or younger who were assigned to the usual care comparison condition did not receive special referrals to any housing assistance or supportive services programs. They also did not receive any additional assistance beyond what was typically provided in emergency homeless shelters. The evaluation team asked emergency shelter staff not to intentionally guide usual care condition families to the intervention programs (including CBRR), but if usual care families found their way into the intervention conditions, they were not denied services. Because emergency shelters are not uniformly regulated, the experiences of usual care participants in the shelters after random assignment were highly variable.

Mandatory services formatted

None

Timing of study formatted

Participants in the CBRR condition received temporary housing subsidies and related services for seven months, on average.

Program funding formatted

CBRR programs typically received funding from the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program funded through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Setting details formatted

The Family Options Study took place in 12 sites across the United States: Alameda County, CA; Atlanta, GA; Baltimore, MD; Boston, MA; Connecticut; Denver, CO; Honolulu, HI; Kansas City, MO; Louisville, KY; Minneapolis, MN; Phoenix, AZ; and Salt Lake City, UT. CBRR providers were community-based nonprofit agencies except in three locations, where city government agencies provided these services.

Secondary domains examined

Program use, housing stability, family preservation, and adult well-being

Earliest publication year
2015
Most recent publication year
2018
Manuscripts
Check edits flag
No
Editor comments

 

 

Primary Service
Housing
Enrollment Period
September 2010 to January 2012
Intervention Duration
0.00
Subgroup data - Hispanic
No
Intervention Cost
$36891
Comparison cost
$40782