1. The experience and outcomes of resettlement into private rented tenancies: findings from the FOR-HOME study Tony Warnes, Maureen Crane and Sarah Coward University of Sheffield Crisis Conference The Private-rented Sector: Making it Work for Homeless Households 22 October 2009, Birmingham

2. Objectives and organisation To describe and evaluate the outcomes of the resettlement of single homeless people from hostels into private-rented sector tenancies (PRS). The presentation will:  Describe the FOR-HOME study  Profile those resettled into PRS  Profile the accommodation  Review the tenants’ experiences over the first six months  Evaluate the advice and support received prior to, with 00andiafter the move

3. Aims: to produce authoritative and longitudinal information about: (a) the experiences of homeless people who are resettled, and (b) the factors that influence the outcomes. To assess the relative contributions to settledness, tenancy sustainment and achieved independence of: * the resettled person’s characteristics * the resettlement preparation and follow-up support * the condition and amenities of the accommodation * events and experiences post-resettlement Funded by the UK Economic and Social Research Council The FOR-HOME study

4. Sample and data collection  400 single homeless people in two clusters: London, and Nottingham / Leeds / Sheffield (Notts/Yorks).  Resettled into permanent accommodation by six homelessness sector organisations. Representative of those resettled by the organisations in 2006.  Semi-structured interviews immediately before being resettled, and after 6 and 18 months. Interviews from June 2007 to November 2009. Key-worker completed questionnaire at baseline.  Information collected includes: accommodation histories; education, training and employment; personal problems; income and expenditure; use of time; family and social networks; help and support before and after moving.

5. Partner organisations

6. The policy and service provision contexts Photo ‘Leeds high density housing’ by Lynne Kirton

7. Changes in Supporting People The programme grant of £1.66 bn announced in Nov. 2008 is being paid as an ‘unringfenced grant’ with no conditions attached Changing roles of hostels for homeless people Capital investment programmes: ‘Places for Change’ Changing roles of social housing Long term trend to target tenancies to vulnerable people Policies driving resettlement into PRS

8. Three policies driving resettlement into PRS

10. Private rented tenants by gender Tenure MenWomenAll Private rented461157 Social housing24994343 All295105400 57 (14.3%) of the FOR-HOME respondents were resettled into private-rented tenancies.

11. No significant ‘background’ differences between PRS and social tenants: by age, gender and ethnicity by the main reasons for current homeless episode, …including alcohol, drug and mental health problems …and debt by previous frequency and duration of … … … … … … … homelessness A slightly higher percentage of the respondents in London were resettled into PR tenancies than in Notts/Yorks (16.6 to 11.3%) but not significant Characteristics of the PRS respondents

12. PRS and social housing tenants by age group

13. The resettlement accommodation Social Housing, Lenton, Nottingham

14. Number of bedrooms

15. Kitchen arrangement

16. Basic furniture missing when moved in (%) Item Local authority Housing association Private- rented Bed655247 Cooker866411 Fridge816013 Carpets / floor covering85542

17. Defects during first six months

19. Housing outcomes at 6 months by tenure PRS OutcomeLAHA Real Lettings OtherAll Percentages In original accommodation 8693955987 Moved to another tenancy 220163 Evicted / abandoned 535145 Died, in prison or rehab 30052 Not known 42053 Sample sizes 1911522037400

20. Thought of giving up tenancy at 6 months PRS OutcomeLAHA Real Lettings OtherAll Percentages Yes, still am2324234525 Yes, but no longer1396510 No6467715065 Sample size 1601401722339

21. Available online at http://www.broadwaylondon.org/

22. Debts by type of accommodation

23. Amount (value) of debt at six months

24. Contact with a tenancy support worker

25. Extent to which benefited from tenancy support (those who received support)

26. The ‘Right Move Scale’ Has eight items, such as: 1. I am ready to take the next step and move to my own accommodation. 2.I am pleased with the accommodation to which I will move....... … 8. Having my own place will enable me to structure my life and become involved in meaningful activities. Scored: 1 ‘Yes, definitely’, 0.5 ‘I think so’, -0.5 ‘Not really’, -1 ‘Definitely not’ and ‘Don’t know’ Administered at baseline, 6 months and 18 months. Gives detailed picture of relative advantages and disadvantages of the different tenancies

27. Right move scale score at baseline and at 6 months by tenure Local auth.HAPRSAll Baseline4.74.94.64.8 At 6 months4.24.43.74.2

28. Index of settledness at six months

29. …

30. Harry *: 51 years-of-age, homeless 24 months Advantages of moving to PRS: ‘Able to come and go as I please’. Problems faced after moving: ‘I did not like the area. The flat was damp. The Housing Benefit was paid to me but I spent some of it on drink and only paid a small amount to the landlord. I asked twice for it to be paid directly to the landlord but this did not happen. I got into arrears of £2,190. I was taken to court and evicted … I was in the flat just 8 months. I had no support. It would have been better if the rent had gone straight to the landlord’. * Pseudonyms used

31. Stephen, 44 years-of-age Homeless since 2003, mainly in hostels. Had bidded for social housing for four years with no success. Advantages of moving to PRS: ‘I have privacy and independence. I have my two sons stay with me at the weekends; I couldn’t do that in the hostel. They’ve become closer to me since I moved here’. Concerns: ‘I’m now looking for work. I’m worried if I’ll be able to afford the rent if I get a job. The rent’s £1,000 a month. I think I might get help but I don’t really know’.

32. Derek, 38 years-of-age, homeless 20 months Low support needs. On streets for short while and then in a hostel. Lost job while on the streets. Applied to the local authority for rehousing but low priority. Advantages of moving to PRS: ‘I have peace, quiet and freedom. I got another job while in the hostel but it was difficult … the hostel was noisy at night, I couldn’t sleep, and I had to get up early each morning. Now I can come home, cook my food and get rest … You need access to move-on accommodation quickly if you are in a hostel and keen to work’.

33. Stephanie, 21 years-of-age Homeless and in temporary supported housing for four years. Has mental health problems. Advantages of moving to PRS: ‘I’m really happy in my flat … I don’t have to share a kitchen and bathroom, and friends can visit. I feel safe here and am making my flat homely. I’ve started voluntary work one day a week’. Problems faced after moving: I’m on the top floor … and the water pipes above me burst last winter and my flat was flooded. The land- lord and Broadway were quick to sort out the mess … I would have found it difficult without their help; I would have got very stressed and anxious’.

35. Summary points 1 Many resettlements into PRS are successful, but some are not PRS tenancies have an elevated risk of debt accumulation, stemming in some cases from HB administration through the Local Housing Allowance, and in others from the relatively high rent PRS tenancies less likely to encourage a sense of ‘settledness’

36. Summary points 2 PRS tenancies associated with relatively low provision of tenancy support, and (as in other tenures) whether people receive it is not consistently related to needs, especially in London Many service users and staff of homeless- ness sector organisations still have negative views about the suitability of PR tenancies for resettling homeless people

37. Summary points 3 * PRS resettlements enable people to move more quickly out of hostels * The condition and facilities of PRS tenancies are as good and in some respects superior to those in social housing when occupation begins – an important asset for many single homeless people * PRS tenancies clearly suit some with independent living skills and low or no support needs

38. Summary points 4 A PRS tenancy for a vulnerable person can be successful when his/her needs are correctly assessed and adequately met Closely-managed placement schemes with co- operation between landlords and homeless people’s service providers have good outcomes Assessing clients' earnings potential and need for advice and tenancy support; and putting appropriate services in place are keys to successful resettlement

39. Thanks to … All the respondents who have participated in this study over an extraordinarily long time. Ruby Fu, Camilla Mercer and Louise Joly who have 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.

40. Contact details Tony Warnes: a.warnes@sheffield.ac.uk Maureen Crane: m.a.crane@sheffield.ac.uk Sarah Coward: s.e.coward@sheffield.ac.uk www.shef.ac.uk/sisa/research/fields/homeless