Two genealogies of supported housing and their implications for outcome assessment
Two genealogies of supported housing and their implications for outcome assessment
复制标题
DOI：
10.1176/appi.ps.54.1.50
复制
发表时间：
2003-01-01
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Barrow, SM
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hopper, K;Barrow, SM
根据纽约市正在进行的实地调查，作者区分了两个“家谱”，或发展传统，支持住房。“住房作为住房”起源于心理健康领域，以支持临床管理的住宅计划的正常化，结构较少的替代方案。“综合住房开发”的起源可以追溯到通过保护和创造负担得起的住房来消除无家可归现象的运动。作者详细介绍了每个谱系的独特前提、指导性关注点和发展逻辑，并将第一个谱系的消费者倡导重点与第二个谱系的住房供应重点进行了对比。作为住房和服务投资战略，这两种方法面临不同的风险，针对不同的选民，发挥特定的优势。作者认为，任何试图衡量其成功或评估其作为社会投资的比较价值的尝试都必须超越客户结果，并接受其所代表的社会利益的不同概念。
Drawing on ongoing fieldwork in New York City, the authors distinguish two "genealogies," or developmental traditions, of supported housing. "Housing as housing" originated in the mental health field to champion normalized, less-structured alternatives to clinically managed residential programs. "Integrated housing development" traces its origins to the movement to combat homelessness by preserving and creating affordable housing. The authors detail the distinctive premises, guiding concerns, and developmental logic of each lineage, contrasting the consumer advocate focus of the first genealogy with the emphasis on housing supply of the second. As housing and service investment strategies, the two approaches run different risks, speak to distinctive constituencies, and play to specific strengths. The authors argue that any attempt to take the measure of their success or to assess their comparative value as social investments must go beyond client outcome and come to terms with discrepant notions of the social good that they, represent.