Scholarlink

Purpose <p>Domestic Violence Housing First (DVHF) prioritizes removing survivors’ immediate barriers to safe and stable housing via unconditional and flexible financial assistance to reduce exposure to violence, increase stability, and improve physical and mental health. The current study sought to understand how DV service providers implement DVHF.</p> Methods <p>This study conducted reflexive thematic analysis on 37.5&#xa0;h of in-person interview data from nine DV organizations located in a single midwestern state. These service providers were all funded by the same mechanism to implement DVHF at their sites. Interviews with providers occurred across two time periods twelve months apart.</p> Results <p>Thematic analysis revealed that sites faced challenges to DVHF implementation, including adapting and changing their budgeting mindsets and how they perceived clients; appropriately staffing and training to implement DVHF; and coping with local and community limitations and challenges.</p> Conclusions <p>DVHF remains a powerful tool to support survivors of violence, but implementation can be more complicated and demanding than anticipated. Funders and policymakers should be prepared to support grantees in implementing and administering new HF programs.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Practice and Practicalities: Challenges To Housing First Implementation across Nine DV Service Providers

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年10月16日

查看全文
  • Kaitlyn M. Sims,
  • Mariel J. Barnes,
  • Kate L. Walsh

摘要

Purpose

Domestic Violence Housing First (DVHF) prioritizes removing survivors’ immediate barriers to safe and stable housing via unconditional and flexible financial assistance to reduce exposure to violence, increase stability, and improve physical and mental health. The current study sought to understand how DV service providers implement DVHF.

Methods

This study conducted reflexive thematic analysis on 37.5 h of in-person interview data from nine DV organizations located in a single midwestern state. These service providers were all funded by the same mechanism to implement DVHF at their sites. Interviews with providers occurred across two time periods twelve months apart.

Results

Thematic analysis revealed that sites faced challenges to DVHF implementation, including adapting and changing their budgeting mindsets and how they perceived clients; appropriately staffing and training to implement DVHF; and coping with local and community limitations and challenges.

Conclusions

DVHF remains a powerful tool to support survivors of violence, but implementation can be more complicated and demanding than anticipated. Funders and policymakers should be prepared to support grantees in implementing and administering new HF programs.