{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","provider_name":"Transistor","provider_url":"https://transistor.fm","author_name":"Policy Crimes","title":"The Biggest 'Housing First' Trial | Dr. Eric Latimer","html":"<iframe width=\"100%\" height=\"180\" frameborder=\"no\" scrolling=\"no\" seamless src=\"https://share.transistor.fm/e/312ed842\"></iframe>","width":"100%","height":180,"duration":4363,"description":"In our first three episodes on the Cost of Homelessness, we explored how housing the homeless can often cost less than leaving them in the emergency system. But that's not always the case for every person, program, or place. And saving money isn't the main goal—ending homelessness is about improving lives.\nIn this episode, we speak with Dr. Eric Latimer, Professor of Psychiatry at McGill University and lead economist on Canada’s landmark At Home / Chez Soi Housing First study. He helps us look carefully at the evidence: Housing First dramatically improved housing stability and life outcomes, and over 50% of the program's cost was offset by reductions in emergency service use.\nWhile in this study Housing First didn’t fully \"pay for itself\", we discuss some fascinating reasons for that, and we explore why we shouldn't always expect cost-neutrality for programs that successfully reduce homelessness.\n\nGet extras and support the show: https://thepublicationcoop.substack.com\n\nGuest: Dr. Eric Latimer is a Professor in the Department of Psychiatry at McGill University and Research Scientist at the Douglas Mental Health University Institute. He was lead investigator for the Montreal site of the At Home / Chez So research and demonstration study on homelessness and mental illness and was its lead economist nationally.\n\nTopics Covered:\nThe results of Canada’s At Home / Chez Soi study, the largest Housing First trial ever conducted\nHow most of the program's cost was offset, and why it didn't quite “pay for itself”, at least in the short term\nKey reasons for variation across \"cost of homelessness\" studies: connecting people to health care and income supports, inclusion of low- or moderate-need participants, and “regression to the mean”\nComparisons with U.S., French, and Finnish studies and programs\nWhy cost savings aren’t the real goal—ending homelessness is about dignity, health, and equity\nStudies referenced:\nEffect of Scattered-Site Housing Using Rent Supplements and...","thumbnail_url":"https://img.transistorcdn.com/-qFAzt9KD_NLQj8vmAK6B_j6BnOIdoMW8aFnoeggW7Y/rs:fill:0:0:1/w:400/h:400/q:60/mb:500000/aHR0cHM6Ly9pbWct/dXBsb2FkLXByb2R1/Y3Rpb24udHJhbnNp/c3Rvci5mbS85NDRh/Y2U1MDcxZDhiZmI2/ZjYyNjVjNmEzMDJl/MDQyYi5wbmc.webp","thumbnail_width":300,"thumbnail_height":300}