Resident and proprietor perspectives on a recovery orientation in community-based housing.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Stable housing is a fundamental human right, and an important element for both mental health recovery and social inclusion among people with serious mental illness. This article reports findings from a study on the recovery orientation of structured congregate community housing services using the Recovery Self-Assessment Questionnaire (RSA) adapted for housing (O'Connell, Tondora, Croog, Evans, & Davidson, 2005). METHODS: The RSA questionnaires were administered to 118 residents and housing providers from 112 congregate housing units located in Montreal, Canada. RESULTS: Residents rated their homes as significantly less recovery-oriented than did proprietors, which is contrary to previous studies of clinical services or Assertive Community Treatment where RSA scores for service users were significantly higher than service provider scores. Findings for both groups suggest the need for improvement on 5 of 6 RSA factors. While proprietors favored recovery training and education, and valued resident opinion and experience, vestiges of a traditional medical model governing this housing emerged in other findings, as in agreement between the 2 groups that residents have little choice in case management, or in the belief among proprietors that residents are unable to manage their symptoms. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study demonstrates that the RSA adapted for housing is a useful tool for creating recovery profiles of housing services. The findings provide practical guidance on how to promote a recovery orientation in structured community housing, as well as a novel approach for reaching a common understanding of what this entails among stakeholders. (PsycINFO Database Record
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".