Personalising support for rough sleepers 8-month interim research findings The Big Event 16 th March 2010

City of London Personalised Budgets project Offered to 15 known rough sleepers –Between 4 and 45 years sleeping out –Consistently refused standard offers –Often had poor relationships with outreach teams Resources available –A Personalised Budgets Co-ordinator –Personal budget of up to £3000 per person –Joseph Rowntree Foundation funded evaluation

The evaluation Conducted by Broadway’s research team in partnership with Lancaster University An action research methodology –Regular reflective meetings with Personalised Budgets Co-ordinator –Qualitative interviews with clients –Monitoring forms showing changes in accommodation situation and support needs Reporting in autumn 2010

Engagement with the project 12 rough sleepers have accepted a personal budget 11 of these have agreed action plans 2 people have refused a personalised budget 1 accepted then dropped out

Outcomes 10 clients are in accommodation 5 clients have started new benefit claims Clients are engaging and planning for a future Clients are beginning to access meaningful occupation

How the way of working brings about engagement ‘Personal service’ is as important as a personal budget –Working where people wish to meet, not at sleep sites –Working alone –Meeting people regularly and spending more time with them –The Personal Budget provides something new to talk about The perceived experience and characteristics of the Co-ordinator (eg. age) are important These result in client’s confidence that this is something different, sense of control, and a trusting relationship

How the way of working brings about change The Co-ordinator: –Helps people define what they would like –Provides support and encouragement –Allays anxiety An action plan is agreed with responsibilities for both client and co-ordinator Many actions (and positive outcomes) do not require the use of the personal budget

The role of the personal budget in bringing about change Provides an incentive to go into accommodation –Eg. furniture, travel costs Enables a flexible response to clients’ individual needs –Eg. rent deposits, temporary accommodation while awaiting resettlement Helps maintain fragile moves by responding to crisis –Eg. service charges, gas and electricity Enables clients to sustain change by planning for a future –Eg. clothes, courses, pre-tenancy training

Challenges Refusals Clients’ anxiety and initial difficulties with going into accommodation The need for longer term support Getting mental health assessments Working with people with drug problems

Conclusions A successful project: 10 people in accommodation Most long term rough sleepers do want to go in The personal budget provides an incentive to go in, enables a flexible response to need and to crisis, and helps people plan for a future The way of working (‘personal service’) can be as important as the personal budget Sustaining these outcomes may require long term support Work is now needed to explore how personalisation can be applied to a broader group of rough sleepers