University of Pennsylvania From the SelectedWorks of Dennis P. Culhane December, 2015 Brisbane Common Ground Evaluation: Final Report Cameron Parsell, University of Queensland Maree Petersen, University of Queensland Ornella Moutou Dennis P Culhane Ed Lucio, University of Queensland, et al. Available at: https://works.bepress.com/dennis_culhane/229/ Brisbane Common Ground Evaluation: Final Report PREPARED FOR: THE QUEENSLAND STATE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND PUBLIC WORK ISSR RESEARCH REPORT Submitted: December 2015 ABN: 63 942 912 684 Institute for Social Science Research Level 4, General Purpose North No.3 (Building 39A) The University of Queensland 4072 Telephone: (07) 3346 7646 | Facsimile: (07) 3346 7646 Institute for Social Science Research Director Professor Mark Western BA(Hons) PhD FASSA CRICOS PROVIDER NUMBER 00025B Acknowledgements The research team are grateful for the assistance provided by Dr Genevieve Dingle. Dr Dingle provided expert advice about the use of validated measures. Staff at Micah Projects and Common Ground Queensland provided significant assistance to the research team throughout the evaluation. Without the continued assistance provided by Micah Projects and Common Ground Queensland, particularly the assistance provided making contact with tenants, the evaluation would not have been possible. Dr Troy Allard also generously gave his expertise to assist with police costing analysis. We received phenomenal support from many sectors of the Queensland Government to access tenant’s administrative data. Initially Catherine Ryan from the Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services and Karen Cosgrove from the Queensland Treasury, were extremely significant in setting up access to enable administrate data. Many people subsequently played important roles in facilitating administrative data access, Ben Wilkinson, Trisha Johnston and Shane Warren were extremely helpful. Thanks also to Ann Harrington, Leah Hodson, Claire Slater, Janet Moncrieff, John Gomes, Kristen Breed, and Melanie Stacey. Catherine Taylor, Principle Data Linkage Officer at Queensland Health, made continued and outstanding contributions to all components of the administrative data. Without Catherine Taylor’s astute capacities the analysis of administrative data would not have been possible. Finally, and as demonstrated throughout this report, tenants’ contributions constitute a central component of this evaluation. The research team relied heavily on tenant participation. We thank the tenants for positively enabling the research team to conduct this research in their homes. Institute for Social Science Research The University of Queensland T +61 7 3346 7344 E [email protected] Brisbane QLD 4072 Australia F + 61 7 3346 7646 W www.issr.uq.edu.au ii Institute for Social Science Research Director Professor Mark Western BA(Hons) PhD FASSA CRICOS PROVIDER NUMBER 00025B Printed Last saved 18 December 2015 File name Final Report Authors Cameron Parsell, Maree Petersen, Ornella Moutou, Dennis Culhane, Ed Lucio, and Alan Dick ISSR Director Mark Western Name of project Evaluation of the Brisbane Common Ground Initiative Name of organisation Queensland Government Project number ISSR020387 Institute for Social Science Research The University of Queensland T +61 7 3346 7344 E [email protected] Brisbane QLD 4072 Australia F + 61 7 3346 7646 W www.issr.uq.edu.au iii Table of Contents Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................1 1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................7 1.1.1 Purpose of the evaluation ...............................................................................................8 1.1.2 Structure of the report ................................................................................................. 11 2 Research Design ............................................................................................................... 12 2.1.1 Literature review .......................................................................................................... 12 2.1.2 Tenancy database ....................................................................................................... 12 2.1.3 Analysis of financial documents .................................................................................. 12 2.1.4 Tenant qualitative interviews ....................................................................................... 13 2.1.5 Stakeholder qualitative interviews ............................................................................... 13 2.1.6 Housing and support satisfaction survey .................................................................... 14 2.1.7 Longitudinal tenant outcomes survey .......................................................................... 15 2.1.8 Tenant service utilisation data ..................................................................................... 18 2.1.10 Limitations ................................................................................................................... 19 3 Supportive housing: a review of the literature ................................................................... 21 3.1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 21 3.1.2 What is supportive housing? ....................................................................................... 21 3.1.3 Who is supportive housing for? ................................................................................... 23 3.1.4 The aims of supportive housing .................................................................................. 24 3.1.5 History of supportive housing ...................................................................................... 24 3.1.6 What is the evidence for supportive housing? ............................................................ 26 3.1.7 Housing sustainment and homelessness exits ........................................................... 26 3.1.8 Elements of success ................................................................................................... 29 3.1.9 Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 30 4 Formative evaluation ......................................................................................................... 32 4.1.1 Has Brisbane Common Ground been implemented as intended, and how well is the initiative managed? ..................................................................................................................... 33 4.1.2 What factors have impacted (positively or negatively) upon implementation? ........... 37 4.1.3 What are the tenancy assessment processes, and how do they contribute to or undermine the intended allocation of properties and tenant mix? .............................................. 43 4.1.4 How is support provided, and are the tenancy managers and support providers working collaboratively? .............................................................................................................. 49 4.1.5 How is access to mainstream and allied service providers achieved, and is it successful? .................................................................................................................................. 54 5 Post-Occupancy evaluation .............................................................................................. 57 5.1.1 How is Brisbane Common Ground rated by tenants, and what are tenants’ preferences for housing and support? ........................................................................................ 57 5.1.2 Is Brisbane Common Ground people’s home? ........................................................... 59 5.1.3 Is Brisbane Common Ground a safe, comfortable and desirable place to live, and what contributes to and undermines this? Is the concierge providing a controlled, safe and welcoming environment?............................................................................................................. 62 5.1.4 In what ways do tenants use or avoid using the building, and what could contribute to more positive or less negative use? ........................................................................................ 67 Institute for Social Science Research The University of Queensland T +61 7 3346 7344 E [email protected] Brisbane QLD 4072 Australia F + 61 7 3346 7646 W www.issr.uq.edu.au iv 5.1.5 What is the impact of the tenant mix (reduced stigma, social interactions, role modelling)? .................................................................................................................................. 75 5.1.6 How do neighbours perceive Brisbane Common Ground? ......................................... 78 5.1.7 Is Brisbane Common Ground a (or developing to be) community resource? ............. 79 6 Longitudinal research and tenant outcomes ..................................................................... 81 6.1.1 What housing outcomes, including sustainability, has Brisbane Common Ground achieved? .................................................................................................................................... 81 6.1.2 What health, quality of life, socio and economic participation, and social and community