A School-Based Homelessness Risk Screening Tool: Design Considerations and Anticipated Impacts

Background and Purpose:

Student homelessness is associated with adverse educational outcomes. Schools are a potential setting to identify children at risk of homelessness, so that their families can be referred to housing organizations for preventive services. The lack of feasible and acceptable homelessness risk screener is a critical barrier to the practice of homelessness prevention in the school setting. This study uses two phases of semi-structured interviews with school staff and parents to develop and qualitatively assess the feasibility and acceptability of a homelessness risk screener for use in a school setting. In doing so, it contributes evidence on how partnerships between schools and housing organizations can be harnessed to prevent family homelessness.

Methods:

The development of the screener and proposed implementation strategies proceeded in two phases. In Phase 1, we sought input on school-based homelessness risk screening from purposively sampled school staff (N=16) familiar with current homeless student identification practices. Based on these interviews, we drafted a screener and set of implementation ideas. In Phase 2, we elicited input on the draft screener and implementation ideas from purposively sampled school staff and parents (N=19, including 13 Phase 1 participants and 6 English- and Spanish-speaking parents with previous housing instability experiences). The end products were a refined screener and proposed set of implementation strategies.

Semi-structured virtual interviews during both phases were approximately 30 minutes. Transcribed interviews were analyzed using MAXQDA software according to qualitative data management guidelines and a transparent “flexible coding” approach to maximize consistency in the coding process and trustworthiness of interpretations.

Findings:

In Phase 1, participants felt that systematic screening could improve capacity to identify and support students experiencing housing instability. However, school staff participants shared that accessibility, privacy, limited housing resources, and staff capacity were a few potential challenges to consider. For example, one respondent mentioned: “... because of stigma, some people ... don't want to identify themselves.” Phase 1 participants also weighed in on the design of the screener. They recommended that it be brief, simple, and universally shared.

In Phase 2, upon reviewing a draft screener and set of implementation ideas, study participants suggested revisions that emphasized a need for improved clarity, accessibility, and succinctness. One participant said: “It’s a little wordy ... I’m getting a bit confused.” Study participants also shared implementation practicalities to consider. One mentioned that the proposed system “could potentially centralize the identification process too much, if done the wrong way.” Echoing Phase 1 input, however, Phase 2 participants anticipated that a refined screener would substantially help staff support students experiencing housing instability.

Conclusions and Implications:

Schools are a potentially crucial platform to identify students at risk of homelessness so that they can be referred for homelessness prevention services. Results underscored the importance of a homelessness risk screener in connecting families with resources. Study participants expressed support for a clear, accessible, and concise screener, but also emphasized the need to ensure it is practical within the school environment.