Assessment of the Massachusetts Flexible Services Program to Address Food and Housing Insecurity in a Medicaid Accountable Care Organization.

Importance: Health systems are increasingly addressing health-related social needs. The Massachusetts Flexible Services program (Flex) is a 3-year pilot program to address food insecurity and housing insecurity by connecting Medicaid accountable care organization (ACO) enrollees to community resources. Objective: To understand barriers and facilitators of Flex implementation in 1 Medicaid ACO during the first 17 months of the program. Design, Setting, and Participants: This mixed-methods qualitative evaluation study from March 2020 to July 2021 used the Reach, Efficacy, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance/Practical, Robust Implementation, and Sustainability Model (RE-AIM/PRISM) framework. Two Mass General Brigham (MGB) hospitals and affiliated community health centers were included in the analysis. Quantitative data included all MGB Medicaid ACO enrollees. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 15 members of ACO staff and 17 Flex enrollees. Main Outcomes and Measures: Reach was assessed by the proportion of ACO enrollees who completed annual social needs screening (eg, food insecurity and housing insecurity) and the proportion and demographics of Flex enrollees. Qualitative interviews examined other RE-AIM/PRISM constructs (eg, implementation challenges, facilitators, and perceived effectiveness). Results: Of 67 098 Medicaid ACO enrollees from March 2020 to July 2021 (mean [SD] age, 28.8 [18.7] years), 38 442 (57.3%) completed at least 1 social needs screening; 10 730 (16.0%) screened positive for food insecurity, and 7401 (11.0%) screened positive for housing insecurity. There were 658 (1.6%) adults (mean [SD] age, 46.6 [11.8] years) and 173 (0.7%) children (<21 years; mean [SD] age, 10.1 [5.5]) enrolled in Flex; of these 831 people, 613 (73.8%) were female, 444 (53.4%) were Hispanic/Latinx, and 172 (20.7%) were Black. Most Flex enrollees (584 [88.8%] adults; 143 [82.7%] children) received the intended nutrition or housing services. Implementation challenges identified by staff interviewed included administrative burden, coordination with community organizations, data-sharing and information-sharing, and COVID-19 factors (eg, reduced clinical visits). Implementation facilitators included administrative funding for enrollment staff, bidirectional communication with community partners, adaptive strategies to identify eligible patients, and raising clinician awareness of Flex. In Flex enrollee interviews, those receiving nutrition services reported increased healthy eating and food security; they also reported higher program satisfaction than Flex enrollees receiving housing services. Enrollees who received nutrition services that allowed for selecting food based on preferences reported higher satisfaction than those not able to select food. Conclusions and Relevance: This mixed-methods qualitative evaluation study found that to improve implementation, Medicaid and health system programs that address social needs may benefit from providing funding for administrative costs, developing bidirectional data-sharing platforms, and tailoring support to patient preferences.

The Impact of Temporary Housing Assistance Expenditures on Subcategories of Health Care Cost for U.S. Veterans Facing Housing Instability.

We sought to estimate the impact of temporary financial assistance (TFA) for housing-related expenses from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs on costs for a variety of health care services. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of Veterans who entered the Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) program between 10/2015 and 9/2018. We assessed the effect of TFA on health care costs using a multivariable difference-in-difference approach. Outcomes were direct medical costs of health care encounters (i.e., emergency department, outpatient mental health, inpatient mental health, outpatient substance use disorder treatment, and residential behavioral health) in the VA system. Temporary financial assistance was associated with a decrease in ED (-$11, p<.003), outpatient mental health (-$28, p<.001), outpatient substance use disorder treatment (-$25, p<.001), inpatient mental health (-$258, p<.001), and residential behavioral health (-$181, p<.001) costs per quarter for Veterans in the rapid re-housing component of SSVF. These results can inform policy debates regarding proper solutions to housing instability.

Experience delivering an integrated service model to people with criminal justice system involvement and housing insecurity.

BACKGROUND: People returning to communities from prison or jail face stressors related to securing housing, including discrimination, restrictions based on prior felony convictions, and limited economic and social resources. Existing housing programs can effectively reduce housing instability but often do not fully address the needs of people involved in the criminal justice system experiencing homelessness who often have co-occurring chronic medical issues, and psychiatric and substance use disorders. METHODS: Project CHANGE is an ongoing program to deliver person-centered, integrated care and services to individuals involved with the criminal justice system and experiencing homelessness. Applying a Screening, Brief Intervention, (Referral to) Treatment framework, a comprehensive needs assessment is followed by delivery of intensive housing and vocational case management; and psychiatric, substance use, and medical services in a single location by an interdisciplinary team. Participants are followed with study interviews for 12 months. The current analysis was designed to assess the baseline characteristics and needs of the sample population, and the intensity of contact required for integrated service delivery. RESULTS: Between November 2019 and September 2021, 86 participants were enrolled, of whom 64% had been released from prison/jail in the past 6 months; the remainder were on parole, probation, or intensive pretrial supervision. Participants were unstably housed (64%) or residing outdoors (26.7%) or in a shelter (24.4%). Most participants had high medical need and frequent healthcare engagement through outpatient and emergency department visits. Most participants were at-risk for clinical depression, and half were diagnosed with anxiety, dissociative, stress-related, somatoform, and other non-psychotic psychiatric disorders. Over 12-month follow-up, the interdisciplinary team made over 500 contact encounters, over half of which resulted in direct services provided, including obtaining vital documents for homelessness verification, housing applications, and employment coaching. CONCLUSION: Navigation of services can be particularly challenging for individuals experiencing criminal justice involvement, homelessness, and co-occurring medical, psychiatric, and substance use issues, which can be addressed holistically in an integrated service model. Integrated service delivery was time-, resource-, and staffing-intensive, and challenged by the COVID-19 pandemic, requiring innovative solutions to sustain participant engagement.

The Impact of Housing Insecurity on Access to Care and Services among People Who Use Drugs in Washington, DC.

People who use drugs are highly marginalized communities and are disproportionately affected by environmental changes-e.g., neighborhood gentrification-that affect housing availability and stability, particularly in urban locations. These changes could negatively affect individuals' access to and utilization of health care and social services, resulting in poorer health outcomes. This study examined the impact of gentrification and housing instability on drug users' access to harm reduction and other health services. Data were collected from 139 clients of a large harm reduction organization. Results showed that 67% of the participants were either unstably housed or homeless, and about one-third of participants indicated that their current housing situations negatively affected their access to primary care (33.9%), behavioral health services (36.7%) and basic services (38.3%). While homeless individuals were still able to access services generally, a greater percentage-compared to those unstably or stably housed-reported difficulty accessing care. As these data were collected prior to the COVID pandemic, it is likely that many of our participants faced greater struggles with housing insecurity and health care access issues due to shutdowns and increased need for social isolation and quarantine. More work is needed to address housing instability and homelessness among already marginalized populations.

Rhode Island's Response for COVID-Positive Individuals Experiencing Homelessness and Housing Insecurity: A Qualitative Process Evaluation.

From March-June 2020, Rhode Island utilized a 209-room hotel as a quarantine/isolation (Q/I) facility for COVID-positive individuals experiencing homelessness or housing insecurity. This qualitative study used semi-structured interviews to explore experiences of key stakeholders in designing and implementing the intervention. Four major themes emerged from the data analysis: 1) the isolative nature of Q/I housing tended to negatively affect residents' mental health, 2) the addition of medical oversight was a key positive development for the intervention, 3) the security presence involved in the response tended to exacerbate residents' mental health challenges, and 4) COVID-19 and this Q/I response highlighted homelessness itself as a public health crisis that must be addressed. Findings from this study may be useful for informing ongoing COVID-19 and future epidemic/pandemic responses, particularly with respect to addressing the needs of people experiencing homelessness.

Risk of food and housing insecurity among college students during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The aim of this study was to assess college students' food and housing insecurity risk amidst the pandemic. Data were collected through an online survey in the summer of 2020 from 1956 graduate and undergraduate students attending a large, private, urban university in the Midwest, U.S. Food insecurity among students increased (25% before; 29% during COVID) with housing insecurity staying roughly the same (34% before; 36% during COVID). Results indicate certain student groups were at greater risk of basic needs insecurity during the pandemic compared to their counterparts. Results also suggest changes in food and housing insecurity trends. College students are burdened with basic needs insecurity, exacerbated during the pandemic. Institutions need to work toward solutions to address the needs of vulnerable populations disproportionately affected by basic needs insecurity. Recommendations on addressing the basic needs of college students are also provided.

'When will this end? Will it end?' The impact of the March-June 2020 UK COVID-19 lockdown response on mental health: a longitudinal survey of mothers in the Born in Bradford study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore clinically important increases in depression/anxiety from before to during the first UK COVID-19 lockdown and factors related to this change, with a particular focus on ethnic differences. DESIGN: Pre-COVID-19 and lockdown surveys nested within two longitudinal Born in Bradford cohort studies. PARTICIPANTS: 1860 mothers with a child aged 0-5 or 9-13, 48% Pakistani heritage. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: ORs for a clinically important increase (5 points or more) in depression (eight item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8)) and anxiety (Generalised Anxiety Disorder Assessment (GAD-7)) in unadjusted regression analyses, repeated with exposures of interest separated by ethnicity to look for differences in magnitude of associations, and lived experience of mothers captured in open text questions. RESULTS: The number of women reporting clinically important depression/anxiety increased from 11% to 20% (95% CI 10%-13%; 18%-22%) and from 10% to 16% (95% CI 8%-11%; 15%-18%), respectively. Increases in depression/anxiety were associated with loneliness (OR=8.37, 95% CI 5.70 to 12.27; 8.50, 95% CI 5.71 to 12.65, respectively); financial (6.23, 95% CI 3.96 to 9.80; 6.03, 95% CI 3.82 to 9.51), food (3.33, 95% CI 2.09 to 5.28; 3.46, 95% CI 2.15 to 5.58) and housing insecurity (3.29, 95% CI 2.36 to 4.58; 3.0, 95% CI 2.11 to 4.25); a lack of physical activity (3.13, 95% CI 2.15 to 4.56; 2.55, 95% CI 1.72 to 3.78); and a poor partner relationship (3.6, 95% CI 2.44 to 5.43; 5.1, 95% CI 3.37 to 7.62). The magnitude of associations between key exposures and worsening mental health varied between ethnic groups.Responses to open text questions illustrated a complex interplay of challenges contributing to mental ill health including: acute health anxieties; the mental load of managing multiple responsibilities; loss of social support and coping strategies; pressures of financial and employment insecurity; and being unable to switch off from the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Mental ill health has worsened for many during the COVID-19 lockdown, particularly in those who are lonely and economically insecure. The magnitude of associations between key exposures and worsening mental health varied between ethnic groups. Mental health problems may have longer term consequences for public health and interventions that address the potential causes are needed.

Variation in State-Level Eviction Moratorium Protections and Mental Health Among US Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Although evictions have been associated with adverse mental health outcomes, it remains unclear which stages of the eviction process are associated with mental distress among renters. Variation in COVID-19 pandemic eviction protections across US states enables identification of intervention targets within the eviction process to improve renters' mental health. Objective: To measure the association between the strength of eviction protections (ie, stages blocked by eviction moratoriums) and mental distress among renters during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used individual-level, nationally representative data from the Understanding Coronavirus in America Survey to measure associations between state eviction moratorium protections and mental distress. The sample of 2317 respondents included renters with annual household incomes less than $75 000 who reported a state of residence and completed surveys between March 10 and September 3, 2020, prior to the federal eviction moratorium order by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Exposures: Time-varying strength of state moratorium protections as a categorical variable: none, weak (blocking court hearings, judgments, or enforcement without blocking notice or filing), or strong (blocking all stages of the eviction process beginning with notice and filing). Main Outcomes and Measures: Moderate to severe mental distress was measured using the 4-item Patient Health Questionnaire. Linear regression models were adjusted for time-varying state COVID-19 incidence and mortality, public health restrictions, and unemployment rates. Models included individual and time fixed effects as well as clustered standard errors. Results: The sample consisted of 2317 individuals (20 853 total observations) composed largely (1788 [78%] weighted) of middle-aged adults (25-64 years of age) and women (1538 [60%]); 640 respondents (23%) self-reported as Hispanic or Latinx, 314 respondents (20%) as non-Hispanic Black, and 1071 respondents (48%) as non-Hispanic White race and ethnicity. Relative to no state-level eviction moratorium protections, strong protections were associated with a 12.6% relative reduction (risk ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-0.99) in the probability of mental distress, whereas weak protections were not associated with a statistically significant reduction (risk ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.86-1.06). Conclusions and Relevance: This analysis of the Understanding Coronavirus in America Survey data found that strong eviction moratoriums were associated with protection against mental distress, suggesting that distress begins early in the eviction process with notice and filing. This finding is consistent with the idea that to reduce mental distress among renters, policy makers should focus on primary prevention of evictions.

Rapid health impact assessment of COVID-19 on families with children with disabilities living in low-income communities in Lusaka, Zambia.

INTRODUCTION: Worldwide, children with disabilities are a vulnerable population and at high risk for COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. There is little information on the impact that COVID-19 had on children with disabilities and their families, particularly in low-income settings. This assessment describes the extent to which the pandemic impacted seven indicators of well-being in three low-income communities in Lusaka, Zambia. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with a random selection of families participating in an existing program (n = 39), community health workers (n = 6), healthcare workers (n = 7) and government officials (n = 2). Descriptive data was summarized and qualitative responses reviewed for themes. RESULTS: Most families reported a major loss of income resulting in food insecurity (79%), housing instability (67%), stress (36%), and increased risk of child separation and neglect (18%). Most families did not report receiving governmental financial assistance and reported loss of access to health services for their child such as physiotherapy (33%). Stakeholders interviewed reported that COVID-19 information was widely available although few specific interventions for children. Families were seen to have greater food insecurity, more poverty, more crowding, less healthcare services and children left alone or on the streets to beg. DISCUSSION: COVID-19 and related containment measures have impacted the lives of children with disabilities and their families to a great extent. There is an urgent need for disability-inclusive responses that deliberately address the needs of children with disabilities and their families, notably uninterrupted access to adequate food, inclusive education, rehabilitation therapy, and income-generating activities.

Where is community during COVID-19? The experiences of families living in housing insecurity.

This article explores the understanding of community to families living in insecure housing in one Australian state during the COVID-19 pandemic. Five female-headed families were interviewed during the pandemic and asked to identify what community meant to them. All participants were referred by an agency caring for families experiencing homelessness or housing insecurity. Community was defined using Bourdieu's concept of social capital, allowing for both bonding and bridging relationships to be explored. Bonding relationships refer to close emotional ties with family and friends, while bridging ties establish networks that provide individuals with access to resources. Two themes emerged that shed light on how community is understood during times of crisis: The first suggests that for families experiencing housing insecurity, particularly women escaping family violence, their links with community were primarily maintained by welfare and church agencies. These organisations provided bridging social capital during the pandemic that allowed the women and their children to cope with the isolation and to maximise opportunities. The second themes point to traditional notions of community as family and geographical space. Here the findings are mixed. Resources provided by government, and mediated through the welfare agency, allowed these families to create a safe and comfortable space. However, for First Nations women, the lockdown meant that it was difficult to maintain community obligations, while children who appeared to identify community with attendance at school found the lockdown confusing because of the disruption to their normal social space.

The COVID-19 pandemic: Adverse effects on the social determinants of health in children and families.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the impact of social determinants on the experience of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic within the pediatric population, how this impact may influence the long-term health and security of children, and what measures can be taken to ameliorate this impact moving forward. DATA SOURCES: Nonsystematic review of relevant literature and news sources. STUDY SELECTIONS: Relevant literature and news sources. RESULTS: There have been increases in housing insecurity and food insecurity during the pandemic, including global increases in poverty. Public policies such as school closures have had a disproportionate impact on those facing adverse social determinants. There has been a dramatic increase in reports of abuse-related injuries and other injuries indicative of child abuse during the pandemic. In addition, there are disproportionate impacts of COVID-19 based on race and ethnicity within the United States. It is clear that children are facing more adverse determinants as a result of this pandemic and that there are both short-term and long-term implications associated. For those living in poverty or with other adverse social determinants of health, the pandemic has made a bad situation worse. Ongoing studies are required to measure the impact of COVID-19 on those with adverse social determinants, in particular among children. CONCLUSION: Social determinants of health must be part of pandemic research priorities, public health and vaccination goals, and economic policy implementation. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has further served to shed a light on the broad disparities that exist within our society and their direct and indirect impacts on health outcomes.

Housing and health inequities during COVID-19: findings from the national Household Pulse Survey.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has exploited the inequities within the US housing system. Examining the association between housing and health during the pandemic is imperative to reducing health inequities and improving population health. METHODS: We analysed 957 714 responses from the Household Pulse Survey Study, collected between April and July 2020. Using survey-weighted multivariable regression analyses, we assessed the relationships between housing tenure and health, both on average and over time, as well as how these relationships were moderated by COVID-19-related hardships including job loss, food insecurity and inability to afford housing-related costs. We controlled for a variety of potential socioeconomic and demographic confounding factors. RESULTS: We found that housing tenure was significantly associated with both self-rated health and mental distress. Compared with homeowners without mortgage debt, homeowners with mortgage debt reported worse self-rated health (ß=-0.13; 95% CI -0.15 to -0.12, p<0.001) and greater mental distress (ß=0.50; 95% CI 0.44 to 0.55, p<0.001). Renters also reported worse self-rated health (ß=-0.18; 95% CI -0.20 to -0.16, p<0.001) and greater mental distress (ß=0.76; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.83, p<0.001) than homeowners without mortgage debt. Across all tenure groups, self-rated health decreased (ß=-0.007; 95% CI -0.011 to -0.004, p<0.001) and mental distress increased (ß=0.05; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.06, p<0.001) over this period. Additionally, time and COVID-19-related hardships compounded differences in health status between homeowners and renters. CONCLUSIONS: These results add to a limited body of evidence suggesting that, during this period, housing instability and COVID-19-related hardships have contributed to an increase in health inequities in the USA.

Impact of COVID-19 on Peer Support Specialists in the United States: Findings From a Cross-Sectional Online Survey.

OBJECTIVE: Peer support specialists (PSS) are an integral part of the mental health workforce. The purpose of this study was to better understand how the COVID-19 pandemic affected their employment status and day-to-day work. METHODS: A cross-sectional, online survey was conducted (May-June 2020). Recruitment occurred through the National Association of Peer Specialists and additional snowball sampling. Closed- and open-ended questions sought information about employment status, work tasks, challenges faced by PSS and by individuals they supported, and positive impacts they experienced. RESULTS: A total of 1,280 surveys were analyzed. Nine percent of respondents reported having lost their job as a result of COVID-19. Of these, 65% reported a length of employment of 2 or more years, and 61% reported working 35 hours or less per week. Job tasks changed dramatically, with 73% reporting engagement in new tasks, including increased reliance on technology (N=717), increased coordination of resources (N=123), and COVID-19-related tasks (N=142). Engagement in some support tasks decreased significantly from prepandemic levels, including individual support provision (p<0.001) and group facilitation (p<0.001). Respondents reported significant challenges among individuals they supported, including increased isolation (92%), substance use (67%), housing instability (38%), and food insecurity (64%). Although respondents also reported challenges, satisfaction with organizational and supervisory support was high. Most respondents (73%) reported positive impacts or benefits from the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The changing roles and tasks identified in this study have implications for hiring, training, supervising, and supporting peer staff. The peer workforce demonstrated flexibility and commitment to meeting increasing needs.