1. M&M Evaluation Year 2: 2011-12 Housing Justice’s pilot mentoring and befriending project

2. Project Aim …To test and develop the contribution that formal befriending schemes can make to ending rough sleeping by supporting current and former rough sleepers…

3. Project Outcomes To improve clients’ confidence, motivation, social networks, mental well-being and use of time To increase the skills of volunteers to become befrienders and mentors To encourage the development of further volunteering and befriending schemes To continuously improve the quality of the scheme

4. Method 14 month project running from Jan 2011- March 2012 Referrals from night shelters, day centres and agencies Robes, Haringey and Kingston night shelters, Hope WorldWide, Connection at St Martins, St Mungos, the Manna Centre, the Marylebone Project 60 people attended mentoring trainings, some of whom were from organisations wishing to set up their own mentoring West London YMCA, the Simon Community, night shelters

5. Method Clients choose if they want a mentor (goal focus) or befriender (social) Assessment and goal setting using the Outcomes Star Mentors and mentees meet for 1-2 hours/ week for 6 months Meetings take place in a public place

6. Support Introductory 3-way meeting Coordinator calls both parties to check in Group supervision for mentors Midway 3-way meeting Closing meeting

7. Resource pack & support to set up independent mentoring projects Resource pack written for night shelters interested in starting their own mentoring or befriending project Training or support offered to those wishing to set up their own mentoring or befriending project Connection Crew, London City Mission – Webber Street, Folkestone Night Shelter, West London YMCA, Simon Community, Street Lytes (Camden C4WS are successfully running their own mentoring project following support offered last year)

8. Mentors & Mentees… 14 successful relationships - lasted 6 mths In addition other 9 relationships were set up but they didn’t last for the full 6 mths – reason for this were: - change in mentees’ circumstances - lack of motivation from mentee

9. M&M clients Living in private rented accommodation or supported housing Age range: 22 – 71 Average age: 44 3 female / 11 male African 5 British 7 (5 White British and 2 Black British) European 1 Pakistani 1

10. Volunteers 60 people attended mentoring trainings in year 2 36 people were in a position to be volunteer mentors in year 2 (i.e. applied, screened and trained) Of these 36, 15 had volunteered in year 1 and 21 were new As M&M is now ending, 15 volunteers are moving on to mentor with another charity

11. M&M Year 1 compared to year 2 Year 1 (2010-11)Year 2 (2011-12) No. of successful relationships1714 No. of relationships that weren’t fully ‘successful’ 59 Age range of mentees22-6422-71 No. of women mentees23

12. Evaluation method A pre and post Outcome Star carried out on 14 clients Semi structured interview conducted on 14 clients

13. Baseline data Areas weakest at project outset (listed from weakest to strongest): Meaningful use of time Social networks Emotional & mental health Motivation/taking responsibility

14. Areas of greatest improvement Meaningful use of time - up 2.3 pts Social network and relationships – up 2.3pt Motivation and taking responsibility – up 1.7 points Emotional and mental health - up 1.2 pts

15. M&M outcomes year 1 compared to year 2 Area of changeYear 1 (2010-11) Outcome improvement Year 2 (2011-12) Outcome improvement meaningful use of time 2.12.3 social network and relationships 1.22.3 motivation and taking responsibility 0.91.7 emotional and mental health 1.61.2 overall5.87.5

16. Areas of little or no change Living skills(0.9% change) Substance use (0.3% change) Managing tenancy(0.5% change) Physical health(0.3% change) Offending(no change) This is very similar to year 1

17. Mentees feedback See Word document ‘In Mentees’ own words’ to read about the impact that some of the mentees feel the project has had on them.

18. Cost £36,000direct project costs £2,570per relationship £24 - 26k cost per year of a homelessness episode http://www.homeless.org.uk/costs-homelessness

19. Bench marking Compared to agencies providing floating support using the Homeless Outcome Star the M&M Project had comparable outcomes (we had marginally higher success, 0.2%) This is impressive given that in the M&M Project the mentoring is carried out by volunteers, unlike staffed projects

20. Longitudinal impact – follow up on year 1 mentees Of the 17 mentees from year 1, Jan- Dec 2010: 1 had passed away (heart attack) 2 were uncontactable 14 were contactable

21. Longitudinal impact – follow up on year 1 mentees Of the 14: 6 were in work 3 were homeless (1 squatting, 1 sofa surfing and 1 sleeping rough) 9 were in PRS, 1 in supported housing, 1 in council housing

22. Longitudinal impact – follow up on year 1 mentees 4 mentees still met with their mentor regularly

23. Recommendations The M&M Project is ending for the time being and it is important that the learning from M&M is not lost. Housing Justice should retain capacity to support and train organisations working with homeless clients to run their own mentoring projects through:

24. Recommendations Promotion of the Toolkit Running trainings tailored to the agency Providing consultancies Not all agencies and projects are in a position to start their own scheme, therefore HJ should continue to fundraise with a view to re- starting M&M as soon as possible.