Methods: In-person semi-structured interviews were conducted with 50 individuals with a diagnosis of serious mental illness who resided in supported housing in communities in a Northeastern state; and 11 housing directors and staff at mental health organizations that provided supported housing for these individuals. Purposeful sampling was used, and the sampling frame was a list of all nonprofit and public mental health organizations in the state that administered supported housing services to individuals with a psychiatric diagnosis. Six organizations that operated in communities dispersed across urban, rural, and suburban areas were chosen for recruitment of respondents from mental health day programs and housing sites affiliated with their organizations. Housing residents self-referred for interviews by responding to research assistants on site for recruitment, or calling phone numbers listed on a recruitment flyer. Housing staff from these six sites were also contacted for an interview. Survey questions were primarily open-ended, and explored provider’s approaches to social and community engagement with residents of supported housing; and residents’ experiences of social and community engagement. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the qualitative responses.
Findings: Housing staff were split in their approaches to community connections. Half provided residents with information on community resources, but did not take any more direct actions to facilitate engagement out of deference to residents’ self-determination. Another half described processes of information, linkage, and engagement in which staff were actively involved – based on residents’ expressed interests – in facilitating initial connections such as volunteering, taking classes, mapping transportation routes, etc. All also described the siting of residences in walkable neighborhoods with commercial establishments, libraries, and service providers as key to the community involvement and connections of the residents. The residents echoed the identification of walkable neighborhoods with stores, cafes, and mental health day programs as the heart of what they described as their community connections. Pointedly, the majority named caseworkers and housing staff as a positive, key presence, including facilitation and jump-starting of social and community connections.
Implications: Future research can further explore and document mechanisms through which housing staff inform, link, and engage with housing residents to facilitate community connections (or not), in ways that honor and enhance self-determination and social inclusion; and housing residents preferences, paths, and processes for social connection.