Assessing Impact in Europe: A Systematic Review of Evaluation Methodologies in Homeless Interventions

Abstract

Homelessness presents a complex societal challenge, necessitating evidence-based interventions. This paper conducts a PRISMA systematic review of impact evaluation methodologies in homeless interventions, examining the existence of standardized methodologies, and the role of theoretical frameworks, consensus on evaluation designs, and reliable outcome variables. Drawing from diverse studies, the research comprehensively analyzes impact evaluations with the goal of yielding valuable insights for practitioners and policymakers responding to the challenges and dynamics of the European context. The findings reveal a lack of standardized methodologies validated by regulatory agencies, particularly within Europe. Theoretical foundations guiding the evaluations vary widely, highlighting the need for a context-sensitive framework that considers the complexities of homelessness and socio-political factors across welfare states. While randomized controlled trials offer rigor, they are underutilized in Europe. The review advocates a mixed-methods approach for comprehensive insights to capture the multifaceted nature of homelessness interventions. Furthermore, the identification of suitable outcome variables emerges as a challenge, with inconsistent definitions hindering cross-study comparisons. The analysis underscores the significance of adopting standardized outcome variables, such as the ETHOS definition, to facilitate robust impact assessments. This review emphasizes the need for methodological refinement and collaboration, enabling comparability between programs and the generation of reliable evidence. Advocating standardized methodologies, robust frameworks, and comprehensive designs, it guides future research, evidence-based policymaking, and effective homeless interventions.