Bidirectional Associations between Housing Insecurity and Instrumental Support: A Random-Intercept Cross-Lagged Panel Model

Background: Housing insecurity is a pervasive social determinant of health that can erode access to tangible support networks over time. Although cross-sectional research has documented associations between housing instability and lower social support, the directionality of this relationship remains unclear. Housing insecurity may deplete instrumental support, for example, through reduced reciprocity or strained relationships, but a lack of instrumental support may also increase vulnerability to housing insecurity. This study examined the bidirectional, longitudinal associations between housing insecurity and instrumental support using a random-intercept cross-lagged panel model (RI-CLPM).

Method: Data were drawn from the Future of Families and Children Wellbeing (FFCW) study, which includes a sample of urban births from 1998 to 2001 across 20 cities. FFCW families were interviewed at the focal child's birth and at ages 1 (wave 2), 3, 5, 9, and 15 (wave 6). Housing insecurity and instrumental support were assessed at five time points (Waves 2–6). Housing insecurity was measured as an observed indicator counting the following events: two or more moves, doubled-up living arrangements, homelessness, or eviction. Instrumental support was assessed through six items measuring access to tangible support, such as having someone to cosign or lend money. A RI-CLPM was estimated using maximum likelihood in Mplus.

Results: The RI-CLPM demonstrated excellent fit (CFI = .995, TLI = .990, RMSEA = .022, SRMR = .016). At the between-person level, trait-like housing insecurity and instrumental support were significantly negatively correlated (b = −.168, p < .001), indicating that individuals with chronically higher housing insecurity tended to report lower instrumental support. At the within-person level, housing insecurity significantly predicted decreases in instrumental support at subsequent waves from Wave 3 onward (b = −.086 to −.142, p < .05), with the effect strengthening over time. In the reverse direction, only one significant path was observed: higher instrumental support at Wave 4 predicted lower housing insecurity at Wave 5 (b = −.036, p < .01). Significant negative residual covariances at all waves (b = −.045 to −.097) indicated shared time-specific influences on both constructs. A traditional CLPM showed poor fit (CFI = .52, RMSEA = .125), highlighting the importance of separating within- and between-person variance.

Conclusions: The findings indicate a predominantly unidirectional within-person process, in which increases in housing insecurity precede declines in instrumental support rather than the reverse. This pattern, where housing instability disrupts social networks and diminishes the capacity to seek and receive tangible assistance, is consistent with stress process theory, which posits that social support is a malleable factor influenced by structural conditions. The single reverse path, in which instrumental support at Wave 4 reduced subsequent housing insecurity at Wave 5, indicates that although support may protect against housing instability, this protective effect is less consistent. These results underscore the need for addressing housing insecurity not only as a material concern but also as a pathway through which broader social resources are undermined. Programs targeting social support alone may be insufficient if underlying housing insecurity is not addressed.