Governance Processes and Recovery Environments in Recovery Homes: The Roles of Decision-Making and Rule Implementation

BACKGROUND: Recovery homes vary in their governance structures, yet little is known about how these differences shape recovery-relevant social environments. This study examined democratic decision-making, rule implementation, and perceived social climate in peer-run Oxford Houses compared to staff-run recovery homes. METHODS: Using data from 306 Oxford House residents and 80 traditional recovery home residents who completed the Social Setting Democracy Scale, analyses tested relationships among governance processes and outcomes. RESULTS: Greater resident participation in decision-making was associated with more positive social environments, and this relationship was statistically linked to perceptions of fair and transparent rule implementation. Oxford House residents reported significantly higher levels of decision-making participation, implementation fairness, rule clarity, and positive social climate compared to residents of staff-run homes. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that the enactment of governance processes. particularly fair implementation, may represent an important mechanism through which recovery environments influence functioning. Democratic governance is discussed as a potentially active ingredient of peer-run recovery models, with implications for recovery housing design and evaluation.