Resettling single homeless people: the challenges of policy changes and needed adjustments Maureen Crane (King’s College London) Tony Warnes (University of Sheffield) Working Together to End Homelessness and Rough Sleeping, Inside Government Conference, London, 8 December 2011

The FOR-HOME study  Longitudinal study ( ) of the resettlement of single homeless people into permanent accommodation.  Sample of 400 people in two clusters: London, and Nottinghamshire / Yorkshire.  Interviewed immediately before being resettled, and after 6 and 18 months. Key-worker completed questionnaire at baseline.  Partners in the study: Broadway, Centrepoint, St Mungo’s and Thames Reach in London; Framework in Nottingham; and St Anne’s in South Yorkshire.  Funded by the Economic and Social Research Council.

Experiences of living independently  For many, the transition was not easy. 48% had never previously had a tenancy, including 85% aged years.  Most (78%) glad to have moved: gained independence and privacy; had control of their own accommodation; and able to start afresh and rebuild their life.  Over time, many decorated their accommodation, and gradually acquired furniture and furnishings and created ‘a home’. Some got a new job, or started education or training courses. Several renewed contact with family and children.

Housing outcomes at 15/18 months (%) Excludes 4 people who died and 25 unknown if still in a tenancy

Managing finances  Most reliant on social security benefits and had low incomes.  Managing finances was major problem. Associated with low income, high utility costs, high rents in private-rented sector, buying things for their home, paying debts, interruptions in social security benefits, poor budgeting skills and financial planning.  Rent arrears and other debts increased over time, particularly among private renters.

Percentages with debts by tenure Housing tenure

Average rent arrears (£s) by tenure Housing tenure

Gaining employment  Many were keen to get a job but found it hard. 23% had full- or part-time jobs when resettled. 29% had jobs at 18 months.  Great deal of movement in and out of work – 62% worked at some time after being rehoused. Many jobs were casual or through an agency, insecure, and low paid. Stopping and starting work affected payment of HB and other benefits  Those who worked ‘intermittently’ most likely to accrue rent arrears, be threatened with eviction and taken to court. Those ‘consistently unemployed’ protected by HB.  16% attended course through Job Centre – for most, did not lead to secure employment.

Support from services once rehoused  Only one-half received support from a tenancy support (TS) worker.  Young people least likely to have a TS worker yet most likely to have no experience of independent-living. Only 27% aged had a TS worker (12% in London).  Some without a TS sought help from their former hostel when having difficulties. Tended not to present until problems serious and tenancies at risk. Staff not always have time to assist if require a great deal of help.

What is needed

What is needed (i)  Given the reduced availability of social housing, and increased reliance on private-rented accommodation for resettlement, well-managed private-rented schemes are needed that provide more than an accommodation vacancy. They need to monitor tenants’ progress, and provide or arrange advice and support.  Help with debt management and improved financial advice and planning before homeless people are resettled, with more attention to financial implications of living independently and intended life choices, e.g. entering full- time education or taking part-time or temporary work.

What is needed (ii)  More assistance for resettled homeless people with few job skills or who have been out of work for some time to obtain training and employment. Also advice about benefit entitlements and changes when starting or stopping work or training.  Improved allocation of tenancy support services to target those most in need. Better access to advice and help for those without a tenancy support worker.

Our warm thanks to … All the respondents who participated in this study over a very long time. Ruby Fu, Camilla Mercer and Louise Joly who helped massively with running the project and coding the data. The freelance interviewers – Gary Bellamy, Paul Gilsenan, Louise Joly and John Miles. Members of the Management Committee: David Fisher (Broadway), Caroline Day and Jennifer Monfort (Centrepoint), Peter Radage and Rachel Harding (Framework), Julie Robinson and Tony Beech (St Anne’s), Simon Hughes and George Miller (St Mungo’s), and John Crowther and Debra Ives (Thames Reach), and to all their colleagues who have been Link Workers or have otherwise assisted with recruitment and tracking.

Contact details Maureen Crane: Tony Warnes: Final report published 11 May Available at: