Tracking formerly homeless people for longitudinal research Maureen Crane and Louise Joly School for Social Care Research Annual Conference, April 2016

This presentation  Maintaining contact with marginalised and hard- to-reach population for longitudinal research.  Examined experiences and outcomes over time for single homeless people who were resettled in London, Nottinghamshire & South Yorkshire.  Initially interviewed at the time they were rehoused and after 6 and 18 months (FOR- HOME study)  Same participants interviewed again five years after they were rehoused (Rebuilding Lives study). Sample: 297 people.at each interview

Disclaimer FOR-HOME study funded by ESRC. Rebuilding Lives (RL) study funded by NIHR School for Social Care Research. The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenters and not necessarily those of the NIHR School for Social Care Research, Department of Health, NIHR, NHS or ESRC.

Strategies to maintain contact with participants  Developed effective and multi-faceted tracking system (consulted with US researchers).  Collected contact details at each interview of participants, and nominated relatives, friends and support workers who could be approached.  Participants given contact slips / freepost envelopes at each interview and asked to return or to ring / text researchers if details changed.  Xmas cards sent each year with contact slip / freepost envelope enclosed – asked to return. y t

Initial methods used to contact RL participants  Participant’s phone, text, , letter, home visit – lost / changed phone; two people changed names.  Contacting nominated relatives & friends. Many moved / changed address – traced where possible.  Door knocking at last known address & talking to current occupiers and neighbours  Contacting nominated support workers, agencies & collaborating homelessness organisations – some changed as gap of 42 months.

Additional methods used to trace RL participants  Searches of electoral roll (192.com)  Searches of court hearings / death indexes  General internet searches. Found details of 2 people in prison, and 1 who had left the country.  Searching / sending messages on social media sites e.g. Facebook, Badoo. Found 14 people.  Searching / sending messages on job-hunting sites. Found 2 people. 1 of these.

Strategies used to encourage continued participation  Use of same interviewer(s) on each occasion to build trust / rapport  Flexibility in terms of arranging interviews to meet participants’ needs / preferences, e.g. working hours, drinking pattern.  Persistence in terms of arranging interviews, e.g. repeat appointments.  Incentive payments at each interview. at each interview

Time taken to trace / arrange a RL interview  Fieldwork lasted 13 months; study was extended.  Period over which time spent tracing a person / arranging an interview: from 1 day to 13 months. 53% within one month; 17% between days; 17% between days; 13% longer than six months. days; 13% > 181  Some people easy to contact but difficult to arrange interview. Some difficult to contact but easy to arrange interview.

DayTracking activityOutcome Day 1Phoned and left message on voic No response Day 2Tried phoning again – no response so wrote with appointment No response Day 6Visited home as per appointment letterSomeone else living in property Day 12Contacted study link workerNo information available Search of electoral rollFound possible person Day 15Search of death indexNo evidence participant had died Day 49Study partner checked CHAIN databaseNo information Day 76Visited address found on electoral rollConfirmed it was our participant but had moved Visited the address providedNo longer there – moved to sheltered housing Visited sheltered housingWas living there but was out. Left letter with appointment for following week Day 81Visited at appointment timeInterviewed participant

Outcomes of tracking potential participants Contact at 5 yearsNumber% Interviewed Contacted / declined interview175.7 Died or in prison144.7 Unable to trace299.8 Total sample297100

Conclusions  Longitudinal studies are costly & time- consuming BUT provide rich data about patterns of behaviour, changes over time, and influential factors.  It is possible to engage vulnerable / marginalised people in research over long period and attain low attrition rate.  Researchers need to be experienced and establish trust and positive relationship with participants. They need to be flexible, gently persistent, patient and non-judgmental.

Our warm thanks to … The study participants who have been involved throughout the five years, and have willingly invited us into their homes and shared their experiences. The tenancy support workers and other staff who participated in Rebuilding Lives. Also members of the Advisory Group and Experts by Experience. Jill Manthorpe, Co-Investigator; Sarah Coward who managed the fieldwork in Notts/Yorks; and Ruby Fernandez-Fu, Fu, John Miles, Jo Moriarty, Daniela Orellana who have assisted with tracking, interviews or data entry. The homelessness sector organisations and their staff who have collaborated and assisted with the design, implementation and dissemination of the FOR-HOME & Rebuilding Lives studies. NIHR School for Social Care Research for funding the study 12

Contact details Maureen Crane: Louise Joly: FOR-HOME final report and policy / practice briefings available at: institute/scwru/res/hrp/hrp-studies/rebuilding.asp x 13