The "Value Added" of Linking Publicly Assisted Housing for Low-Income Older Adults with Enhanced Services: A Literature Syntheses and Environmental Scan. Program Models and Components


The literature described several aspects of program models and components to consider, including:

  • Mix of services provided--The reviewed programs varied widely in the mix of services offered, such as whether they offered home-delivered or congregate meals, social/recreational activities, mental health services, transportation, health and wellness services, personal care assistance, occupational therapy, assistance with obtaining assistive technology (AT), etc.

  • Project-based versus tenant-based (for example, CHSP was project-based while HOPE IV was tenant-based).

  • Service flexibility versus “packaged” services--flexibility was mentioned as an advantage in some studies. Not every tenant or property can adhere to a strict service delivery system.

  • Whether participants have to move to receive services or they can remain in their homes (for example, in HOPE IV about 40% of participants had to move to become eligible for the program, while in CHSP participants could remain in their homes)--residents not having to move to receive services was mentioned as a factor that facilitated buy-in in the Just for Us program.

  • Congregate housing versus scattered-site--The HOPE IV evaluation suggested that HUD policies ensure a variety of housing options for frail older adults to choose from; however, this has implications for service coordination and delivery.

View full report


"ValueAdd.pdf" (pdf, 1.94Mb)

Note: Documents in PDF format require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. If you experience problems with PDF documents, please download the latest version of the Reader®