Evidence Tools
MCHbest. Housing Instability: Child.
Strategy. Housing Vouchers and Subsidies (Child)
Approach. Expand families access to long-term rental vouchers and subsidies to improve outcomes for children
Overview. Housing vouchers play a significant role in assisting families experiencing homelessness by addressing housing instability and its impact on child welfare outcomes. Housing voucher programs, particularly those offered through programs such as the 'Family Unification Program,' play a crucial role in assisting families experiencing homelessness by providing them with stable housing, reducing the risk of child welfare involvement, and promoting overall family well-being.[1,2,3]
Evidence. Moderate Evidence. Strategies with this rating are likely to work. These strategies have been tested more than once and results trend positive overall; however, further research is needed to confirm effects, especially with multiple population groups. These strategies also trend positive in combination with other strategies. (Clarifying Note: The WWFH database calls this "some evidence").
Access the peer-reviewed evidence through the MCH Digital Library or related evidence source. (Read more about understanding evidence ratings).
Source. Peer-Reviewed Literature
Outcome Components. This strategy has shown to have impact on the following outcomes (Read more about these categories):
- Policy. This strategy helps to promote decisions, laws, and regulations that promote public health practices and interventions.
- Social Determinants of Health. This strategy advances economic, social, and environmental factors that affect health outcomes. SDOH include the conditions in the environments in which people are born, live, learn, work, play, worship, and age that affect a wide range of health, functioning, and quality-of-life outcomes and risks.
Detailed Outcomes. For specific outcomes related to each study supporting this strategy, access the peer-reviewed evidence and read the Intervention Results for each study.
Intervention Type. Policy Development and Enforcement (Read more about intervention types and levels as defined by the Public Health Intervention Wheel).
Intervention Level. Population/Systems-Focused
Examples from the Field. There are currently no ESMs that use this strategy. As Title V agencies begin to incorporate this strategy into ESMs, examples will be available here. Until then, you can search for ESMs that have similar intervention components in the ESM database.
Sample ESMs. Here are sample ESMs to use as models for your own measures using the Results-Based Accountability framework (for suggestions on how to develop programs to support this strategy, see The Role of Title V in Adapting Strategies).
Quadrant 1: PROCESS MEASURES:
OUTCOME MEASURES:
|
Quadrant 2: PROCESS MEASURES:
OUTCOME MEASURES:
|
Quadrant 3: PROCESS MEASURES:
OUTCOME MEASURES:
|
Quadrant 4: PROCESS MEASURES:
OUTCOME MEASURES:
|
Note. When looking at your ESMs, SPMs, or other strategies:
- Move from measuring quantity to quality.
- Move from measuring effort to effect.
- Quadrant 1 strategies should be used sparingly, when no other data exists.
- The most effective measurement combines strategies in all levels, with most in Quadrants 2 and 4.
Learn More. Read how to create stronger ESMs and how to measure ESM impact more meaningfully through Results-Based Accountability.
References
[1] Fowler, P. J., Brown, D. S., Schoeny, M., & Chung, S. (2018). Homelessness in the child welfare system: A randomized controlled trial to assess the impact of housing subsidies on foster care placements and costs. Child abuse & neglect, 83, 52-61. [2] Brown, S. R., Thurber, A., & Shinn, M. (2023). Mothers’ perceptions of how homelessness and housing interventions affect their children’s behavioral and educational functioning. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. [3] Gubits, D., Shinn, M., Wood, M., Brown, S. R., Dastrup, S. R., & Bell, S. H. (2018). What interventions work best for families who experience homelessness? Impact estimates from the family options study. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 37(4), 835-866.