IPS in Supported Housing

Fidelity and Employment Outcomes Over a 4 Year Period

Bibliographic Data

ID15518307
AuthorsDiana Roeg (0000-0003-4431-7889, Tilburg University, corresponding author), Lars de Winter (0000-0002-0523-3204), Cris Bergmans, Chrisje Couwenbergh, Peter McPherson (0000-0003-0998-9137, University College London), Helen Killaspy (0000-0003-2481-4802, University College London), Jaap Van Weeghel (0000-0002-8537-6167, Tilburg University)
Year2021
Volume11
Publication date2021-01-14
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1664-0640 • E-ISSN: 1664-0640
PublisherFrontiers Media (PUBLISHER • CH)
DOI10.3389/fpsyt.2020.622061
OpenAlexW3119946126
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited26

Background: People with severe mental illness have difficulties finding and maintaining competitive employment. This is particularly so for those living in supported housing who, by definition, have significant day-to-day support needs: in the Netherlands only 3 to 5% of people with serious mental health problems who live in supported housing are competitively employed. To support these people in finding and maintaining competitive employment, Individual Placement, and Support (IPS) was introduced within supported housing services in the Netherlands in 2015. As this is the first country that broadly implemented IPS in supported housing settings, this paper will focus on the first results regarding feasibility and effects on employment in clients of IPS in this sector. Methods: We investigated the feasibility and employment outcomes of delivering IPS in supported housing services using fidelity assessments and quarterly employment outcomes on IPS program level within eight supported housing organizations, and compared these with 21 mental health treatment organizations in the Netherlands over a 4 year period. We investigated possible reasons for our findings and their implications through qualitative evaluations of the IPS fidelity assessors' notes and additional focus groups with IPS specialists and coordinators from supported housing services and fidelity assessors. Results: The overall fidelity scores indicated reasonable implementation of the IPS model within both supported housing services and mental health services. However, there were differences between services with regard to specific fidelity items; mental health treatment organizations scored higher for team integration, whereas supported housing services scored higher for rapid job search and caseload size, diversity of jobs, and employers. Our qualitative data suggested that the difference in team integration between the two sectors was due to differences in their organizational and financial structures, as well as in the specific needs of their clients. Conversely, supported housing services had better connections with employers which facilitated more rapid job searching and greater diversity in employment opportunities. The average total client employment rate did not significantly differ; and was 25.8% per quarter in supported housing services and 29.6% in mental health treatment services. Conclusion: Implementing IPS in supported housing settings is both feasible and effective

Business · Diversity (politics · Fidelity · Focus group · Housing First · Mental health · Mental illness · Political science · Psychiatry · Supported employment · Work (physics · Engineering · Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes · Medicine · Mental Health and Patient Involvement · Nursing · Psychology · Schizophrenia research and treatment · Marketing

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access