New Report: Recovery Housing Can Help Reduce Homelessness

Programs focusing on sobriety are important resources in homelessness services 

NEW YORK, NY – In the past decade, the Housing First model became the status quo effort to combat the homelessness crisis. This focus on permanent supportive housing (PSH), coupled with established short-term solutions like outreach and shelter, created a framework dedicated to each end of the homelessness spectrum. However, this approach may not serve a large portion of homeless individuals well. As many as 70-80% may have a substance abuse disorder, according to some surveys. A middle-ground approach called recovery housing could give these individuals more time to establish sobriety than short-term programs and hold them more accountable to their recovery than PSH.  
 
In a new report, Manhattan Institute senior fellow Stephen Eide argues that expanding recovery housing programs could reduce homelessness rates. Recovery housing is an intermediate-length residential program for people in recovery from drug or alcohol addiction. The program prohibits substance use and does not utilize medical treatment, but hinges on peer support and social settings to extend residents’ sobriety with the goal of permanent recovery.  
 
Recovery housing is acutely positioned to serve homeless individuals because it addresses a root cause: addiction. An estimated 250,000–300,000 people already use recovery housing each year, and the programs are increasing despite some regulatory flaws. Eide finds that unlike the broader housing sector where overregulation is a concern, recovery housing faces a problem in under-regulation. About one-third of states have no official definition of recovery housing, and most do not maintain a database of homes. There have also been some cases of fraud and low-quality programs due to the lack of oversight. 

With key improvements and better funding, Eide concludes that the support offered through recovery housing could reduce homelessness and create a more balanced homeless service system. He makes the following recommendations to improve and expand recovery housing across the country:

• State government should remain the center of recovery housing policymaking, due to it being a highly decentralized sector.  

• States should expand certification for recovery houses to ensure quality and legitimacy. 

• States should create exceptions for recovery housing in eviction law to maintain the substance-free integrity of its recovery environment.  

Click here to read the full report.