Outcomes of the resettlement of
single homeless people
Presentation to the Homelessness and Support Division,
Department for Communities and Local Government
27 June 2013
Maureen Crane,1 Tony Warnes2 and Louise Joly1
1. Social Care Workforce Research Unit, King’s College London
2. School of Biological Sciences and Medicine, University of Sheffield
1
Presentation
 Brief overview of the aims of resettlement and resettlement
practices
 Design of the FOR-HOME study of resettlement outcomes
 Findings from the FOR-HOME study
 Introduction to the Rebuilding Lives study
Resettlement aims and practices
 To assist homeless people to achieve independent living and
rebuild their lives, and thus prevent repeat episodes of
homelessness.
 To avoid long-term or chronic homelessness and a reliance on
hostels and homelessness sector services.
 Resettlement practice varies greatly, i.e. its timing, help
received before being rehoused, availability of support postresettlement.
 Lack of evidence in UK about outcomes over time for
homeless people who are resettled.
3
Aims
To collect information over time about: (a) the
experiences of homeless people who are resettled,
and (b) the factors that influence the outcomes.
Study conducted at the University of Sheffield by Tony
Warnes, Maureen Crane and Sarah Coward. Funded by
the Economic and Social Research Council.
4
Partner organisations
5
Study design and data collection
 The sample: 400 single homeless people resettled into
independent accommodation by the six organisations. Two
clusters: London, and Nottingham / Leeds / Sheffield
(Notts/Yorks).
 Semi-structured interviews conducted immediately before
being resettled, and after 6 and 15/18 months. Key-worker also
completed questionnaire at baseline.
 Interviews from June 2007 to March 2010. Tracking exercise at
12 months (and when necessary) to check the participants’
whereabouts.
6
Principal lessons on methodology and execution

Importance of close collaboration with homelessness serviceproviders – partners in study and involved in design, recruitment,
tracking, interpretation and dissemination of findings.

Important to have large sample to collect authoritative evidence and
enable analyses of various circumstances and problems. Took 15
months to recruit sample.

Longitudinal studies are lengthy and time-consuming, but provide
rich information about changes in people’s circumstances over time.
Retrospective data less reliable.

FOR-HOME achieved low attrition rate – as a result of flexibility and
consistency when interviewing, and an effective tracking system
(essential for this client group). At end of study, the circumstances of
94% known.
7
The study participants, their
achievements and housing outcomes
Profile of the participants
 296 men and 104 women
 24% aged 17-24 years; 62% aged 25-49; 14% aged 50+ yrs
 56% White British, 44% other ethnicity
 Problems: 63% mental health, 33% alcohol, 57% drugs (38%
mental health + drugs; 24% mental health + alcohol)
 19% literacy difficulties
 51% never previously lived alone
 30% homeless more than 5 years; 39% homeless 2+ times
 48% moved to local authority housing, 38% to housing
association tenure, 14% to private-rented
9
Achievements since being rehoused
 Most (78%) glad to have moved: gained independence and
privacy; had control of their accommodation; able to start
afresh and rebuild their life.
 Many gradually acquired furniture and furnishings, and created
‘a home’.
 Some obtained jobs, or started education or training courses.
9% working when resettled and 18% at 15/18 months. Another
16% worked at some time since being resettled.
 Several renewed contact with family and children, or family
relationships improved. By having own place, able to entertain
family and friends and have their young children to stay.
10
Financial difficulties and debts
Major difficulty was managing finances and paying bills – rent
arrears and other debts increased over time.
Common reasons for increase in debts:
 Nearly one-half (46%) had debts at start of tenancy - 38% owed
rent to pre-resettlement hostel / housing project
 Old rent arrears and court fines resurfaced once rehoused
 Loans from social security and elsewhere to furnish home
 Difficulties understanding / paying utility bills
 In and out of low-paid jobs affected HB and SS benefits
 Poor budgeting skills; alcohol and drug misuse
11
Prevalence of debts over time by age groups
90
Percentage with debts
77
60
73
68
67
52
46
41
45
38
32
30
0
17-24
25-39
40-49
50+
All
Age groups (years)
When resettled
At 15/18 months
12
Those most affected by debts
 Very young people – those aged 17-19 least likely to have
debts when resettled (29%) and most likely to have them by
15/18 months (79%)
 People with mental health problems – experienced great
difficulties budgeting and sorting out bills
 People with more chaotic histories (drug problems or repeat
episodes of homelessness)
 Association between owing rent on pre-resettlement
accommodation and defaulting with rent on new tenancy
13
Tenancy support
 Only 51% had a tenancy support (TS) worker after being
rehoused.
 Those who had TS worker were less likely to have accrued rent
arrears.
 Those with mental health, alcohol or drug problems were more
likely to be linked into mental health and substance misuse
services if had TS worker.
 Young people (17-24) least likely to have a TS worker yet most
likely to have no experience of independent-living – 73% had
no TS worker.
 Some young people without TS worker sought help from
former hostel staff – staff not have capacity to give substantial
help if problems complex and required intense interventions.
14
Housing outcomes at 15/18 months by location
100
Original housing
Percentage of participants
86
New tenancy
79
80
No tenancy
68
60
40
21
20
5
9
11
14
7
0
London
Notts/Yorks
All
Age groups (years)
Note: Excludes 4 people that died and 25 unknown if still in a tenancy
15
Housing outcomes at 15/18 months by age groups
Percentage of participants
100
80
Original housing
85
83
79
New tenancy
71
No tenancy
60
40
20
14 15
5
8
14
11
6
4
40-49
50+
0
17-24
25-39
Age groups (years)
Note: Excludes 4 people who died and 25 unknown if still in a tenancy
16
Key influences on outcomes
The pre-resettlement accommodation
Strong associations between type of accommodation before
resettlement, duration of stay and housing outcomes. More likely
to sustain a tenancy if:
 Not slept rough during preceding 12 months
 In semi-independent accommodation before being resettled
 In last hostel / supported housing >6 months before being
resettled. The likelihood of sustaining a tenancy increased
with length of stay (up to 3 years) in the hostel / housing
project. Additional months of stay beyond 3 years slightly
increased the likelihood of tenancy failure.
18
Housing outcome at 15/18 months by length of
stay in pre-resettlement accommodation
100
91
100
95
92
25-36
37-48
>48
Percentage still housed
84
75
73
67
50
25
0
Up to 3
4-6
7-12
13-24
Length of stay (months)
19
Why duration of stay in the pre-resettlement
accommodation is influential
Longer stays provide more opportunities:
 to resolve or come to terms with personal problems
(‘recovery time’) – through self-reflection, help from hostel
staff and others, and accessing specialist help such as
mental health or substance misuse services.
 to become involved in lifeskills training and ETE (education,
training, employment) and thus build or restore
independent-living skills.
 to develop or restore confidence and self-belief, and plan for
the future.
Shorter stays may characterise those with a more chaotic
lifestyle – but not evident among FOR-HOME participants
20
Housing outcomes at 15/18 months by tenure
100
Original housing
87
81
Percentage of respondents
New tenancy
79
80
No tenancy
60
47
40
31
22
20
14
14
8
5
5
Local
authority
Housing
association
7
0
Private rented
All
Note: Excludes 4 people who died and 25 unknown if still in a tenancy
21
Why moves to the private-rented sector
(PRS) had poorer outcomes
 Less satisfaction with the accommodation as more likely to be
bedsits – little space or privacy, and conflicts sharing kitchens /
bathrooms.
 Poor property maintenance – difficulties getting landlords to do
repairs.
 Shorter, less secure tenancy agreements – feelings of
unsettledness and accommodation not being ‘home’.
 Higher rents in PRS contributed to financial difficulties and
debts, particularly when starting / stopping work and LHA
stopped / reduced.
 Among people who moved to a ‘managed’ PRS scheme, a higher
tenancy sustainment rate was achieved (72% still in original
tenancy at 15/18 months).
22
Percentages with debts by tenure
90
83
when resettled
Percentage of respondents
15/18 months
67
66
65
60
45
46
44
45
30
0
Local authority
Housing
association
Private rented
All
23
Average rent arrears (£s) by tenure
350
305
300
6 months
15/18 months
Pounds (£s)
250
187
200
150
131
110
105
100
61
50
42
38
0
Local authority
Housing
association
Private rented
All
24
Other influences on outcomes
More likely to remain housed if:
 involved in ETE at time of resettlement
 received training before resettlement on paying bills
 liked neighbourhood and good transport links in area
Less likely to remain housed if:
 using illegal drugs at resettlement
 in care as a child 24+ months
No relationship between tenancy sustainment and:
 mental health or alcohol problems at resettlement
 previous experience of living alone
 being employed (those consistently unemployed were ‘protected’ by
welfare benefits)
Resettlement in the future:
recommendations for policy-makers
and service-commissioners in light of
FOR-HOME’s findings
The work of hostel staff
Given the imposition of shorter stays in many hostels and ‘supported
accommodation’, there is an increasing need for more intensive work with
hostel residents, particularly around:

Coming to terms with / resolving personal problems

Engaging in independent-living training programmes and ETE

The management of personal finances. Requires measures to avoid /
tackle rent arrears while in hostels, and financial training for selected
staff who can then advise on day-to-day money management,
payment of household bills, financial implications of taking loans or
making changes such as starting work or college, and tackling debts.

Having realistic expectations of available move-on housing – PRS
rather than social housing; short rather than long or open-ended
tenancies; no longer spacious accommodation for young people and
a likely need to share some facilities.
27
Move-on accommodation and support
 Given that the PRS is nowadays often the only resettlement
option for many homeless people, it is essential that
homelessness sector organisations have access to ‘managed’
PRS schemes that support the tenant and the landlord. The
FOR-HOME findings suggest that these are more effective than
other PRS arrangements.
 There is a need for effective tenancy support for homeless
people who are rehoused. Specialist tenancy support services
should be targeted at those most in need. Other ways to
provide advice and help post-resettlement should be explored,
e.g. use of volunteers as peer supporters, ‘drop-in’ surgeries at
day centres or other sites.
Rebuilding Lives
Maureen Crane, Louise Joly and Jill Manthorpe
Social Care Workforce Research Unit,
King’s College London
Study funded by School for Social Care Research, National Institute for
Health Research
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR School
for Social Care Research or the Department of Health, NIHR or NHS.
Aims of Rebuilding Lives
 To collect information about the circumstances of formerly homeless
people five years after being rehoused, and their ability to sustain
tenancies and achieve independent living.
 To identify their longer-term social care and support needs, the
characteristics of those who continue to require help, and whether
their needs are currently met.
 To identify the roles of different practitioners (social care, health and
housing agencies) in providing longer-term support to formerly
homeless people, effective ways of delivering the required help, and
the challenges and difficulties of delivering this support.
 To contribute to: (a) policy, public health and commissioning debates
about the provision of longer-term support for formerly homeless
people; and (b) practice debates about the support that is required to
enable them to manage a tenancy and rebuild their lives.
30
Design of Rebuilding Lives
 Involves 295 FOR-HOME participants who were still housed at 15/18
months (in the resettlement accommodation or another tenancy) and
said we could contact them again.
 The six FOR-HOME homelessness organisation partners are
collaborating in the new study.
 To achieve continuity and encourage participation, the same
interviewers are involved.
 Participants will be interviewed five years after they were resettled.
For those who have received care and support in the last 12 months
(other than treatment for health conditions) and who give consent,
interviews will also be conducted with the support staff / practitioners.
 Study started March 2013 and due to finish June 2014. Interviews
started in April, and to date, **** interviews have been completed with
resettled participants.
31
Rebuilding Lives
Contact details
Maureen Crane: maureen_ann.crane@kcl.ac.uk
Louise Joly: louise.m.joly@kcl.ac.uk
Tony Warnes: a.warnes@shefffield.ac.uk
FOR-HOME final report published 11 May 2011
Available at:
www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/kpi/scwru/pubs/2011/craneetal2011
forhomefinalreport.pdf
32
Our warm thanks to …
All the respondents who have 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.
33