Evaluating Maryland's Homeless Solutions Program Outcomes
This paper presents an outcome-based evaluation of Maryland's Homeless Solutions Program (HSP), which was consolidated under the Department of Housing and Community Development in 2017. The evaluation pursues three objectives: assessing the HSP's contribution to reduced homelessness statewide, determining whether participation improves financial literacy knowledge, and examining whether participation leads to better mental health outcomes. Using a pre-post interventional research design and a mixed-methods approach, the study combines quantitative data from document reviews and PHQ-9 surveys with qualitative interview data collected across three HSP-funded crisis shelters. Results are analyzed using ANOVA, chi-square tests, and thematic coding to measure change over time.
- Introduction and Evaluation Objectives: Three objectives and key variables introduced
- Research Design and Sample Selection: Pre-post design, shelter selection, and sampling
- Assessing Homelessness Reduction: Data and Methods: Document review and ANOVA for housing stability
- Measuring Mental Health Outcomes with the PHQ-9: PHQ-9 survey administered at three time points
- Evaluating Financial Literacy Through Qualitative Interviews: Interview guide and thematic coding approach
- Conclusion: Mixed-methods evaluation contribution summarized
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper clearly aligns each evaluation objective with a specific data collection method and analytical technique, making the methodology transparent and logically coherent.
- It appropriately distinguishes between quantitative and qualitative approaches for different research questions, demonstrating methodological awareness suited to a mixed-methods design.
- The paper attends to practical rigor by detailing sampling criteria, eligibility requirements, consent procedures, and comparison panels, showing attention to both internal validity and ethical standards.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates the effective application of a pre-post interventional research design within a program evaluation context. By specifying baseline and follow-up measurement points (start, three months, and six months), and by using 2017 as a natural policy intervention cutoff for homelessness data, the author shows how quasi-experimental logic can be applied to real-world social program assessment without a randomized control group.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens by framing the evaluation's three core objectives and defining the relevant variables. It then justifies the pre-post research design before describing sampling procedures and ethical safeguards. Three subsequent sections address each objective in turn, specifying data sources, instruments (such as the PHQ-9 and interview guides), and analytic techniques (ANOVA, chi-square, and thematic coding). A brief conclusion synthesizes the evaluation's expected contribution to the literature.
Introduction and Evaluation Objectives
This paper presents an outcome-based evaluation designed to assess Maryland's Homeless Solutions Program's (HSP) effectiveness in realizing its intended objectives (Schalock, 2013). The HSP's concept map indicates that the program seeks to reduce the number of homeless people in the state, increase participants' awareness about financial literacy, and expand participants' access to mental health professionals. This evaluation pursues three objectives: to assess whether the HSP has effectively contributed to reduced homelessness in the state of Maryland, to determine whether participation in the program increases knowledge about financial literacy, and to determine whether participation results in improved mental health for participants.
The variables of interest for the first objective are homelessness rates and the number of HSP program beneficiaries who have managed to secure and maintain stable housing. The variables of interest for the second objective are knowledge about budgeting, borrowing, saving, and investing (Dewi et al., 2020). More specifically, the evaluation seeks to determine whether the number of homeless people in Maryland has declined as a result of the HSP, whether participants report improved mental health, and whether program participants are more knowledgeable about budgeting, borrowing, saving, and investing as a result of taking part in the program.
References
Aggarwal, R., & Ranganathan, P. (2019). Study designs: Part 4 – interventional studies. Perspectives in Clinical Research, 10(3), 137–39.
Dewi, V. I., Febrian, E., Effendi, N., Anwar, A., & Nidar, S. (2020). Financial literacy and its variables: The evidence from Indonesia. Economics and Sociology, 13(3), 133–54.
Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R., & Williams, W. (2001). The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) scoring. JGIM, 16(1), 606–16.
Luell, S. (2020). Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development Homelessness Solutions – Homelessness rate reduction and Covid-19 response. NCSHA. https://www.ncsha.org/wp-content/uploads/Maryland-Special-Needs-Housing-Combating-Homelessness-2020.pdf
Schalock, R. L. (2013). Outcome-based evaluation. Springer Science & Business Media.
Shim, J. K., & Siegel, J. (2008). Budgeting basics and beyond (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.