Please note; we are in the midst of drafting these pages.

We must begin by acknowledging that the Covid era had put a stop to much international travel over a period when dialogue between the UK, rest of Europe and the 'new world' over PIEs, was just beginning to grow.

In consequence, none of the PIElink team have yet had the opportunity to visit services outside of Europe and a few states in the US, and the content on these pages will hopefully change quite markedly as the dialogue develops.

Nevertheless, from the point of view of Europe, the development of Housing First outside the US is striking; and the example of HF in Canada is particularly interesting; and worth exploring.

In Canada, for example, homelessness policy make a clear distinction between four components of policy and implementation, which sheds light on some of the dilemmas and ambiguities in the development of HF in the UK and the rest of Europe. Here we quote in full a statement from the HomelessHub,

'In order to fully understand how Housing First is applied in different contexts, it is important to consider different models. While there are core principles that guide its application, it is worth distinguishing Housing First in terms of: a) a philosophy, b) a systems approach, c) program models, and d) team interventions.

1. As a philosophy, Housing First can be a guiding principle for an organization or community that prioritizes getting people into permanent housing with supports to follow.
2. Housing First can be considered embedded within a systems approach when the foundational philosophy and core principles of Housing First are applied across and infused throughout integrated systems models of service delivery.
3. Housing First can be considered more specifically as a program when it is operationalized as a service delivery model or set of activities provided by an agency or government body.
4. Finally, one needs to consider Housing First teams, which are designed to meet the needs of specific target populations, defined in terms of either the characteristics of the sub-population (age, ethno-cultural status, for instance), or in terms of the acuity of physical, mental and social challenges that individuals face.

This analysis of ways of seeing and implementing HF helps clarify the wide range of responses seen elsewhere. In particular, in PIE terms, it suggest that the more systemic approach, the broader overview and language that has developed for PIEs in the UK may prove to be valuable in finding the common ground in practice between many diverse services 'on the ground'.

But this discussion has barely begun. It remains to be seen how far the PIEs approach - itself a systemic approach and arguably as much a 'philosophy' as a programme - is useful here; or the specific tools for developing as PIEs, such as the PIEs 2.0 framework or the Pizazz.

PIElink pages on Housing First and PIEs

Is Housing First itself a PIE approach? : HERE

Housing First and PIEs - parallel lines meet : HERE

(Balancing) principles and pragmatism in PIEs and HF : HERE

Housing First, PIEs and the Pizazz (Special Interest Group) : HERE

Housing models, Housing First and PIEs in the US and the UK : HERE

Housing First and PIEs - how do they work together? : HERE

Housing First in the 'new world' : HERE

Housing First and PIEs in Europe : HERE

The lasting legacy of 'Supporting People' : HERE

Other related PIElink pages

Cross-cultural Dialogues on Homelessness: from Pre-treatment Strategies to Psychologically Informed Environments (the page of the book) : HERE

'Recovery Housing' in the US and the UK : HERE

PIEs, 'scattered site' and 'networked' housing : HERE

Outreach, in-reach and pathways : HERE