Select Committee on Office of the Deputy Prime Minister: Housing, Planning, Local Government and the Regions Third Report

5 Temporary Accommodation

125. Those who are moved off the streets, or present as homeless to their local authorities are almost always placed in temporary accommodation to await placement in permanent homes. Some temporary accommodation also proves living support - whether high level for those who are unlikely ever to be successfully and safely re-housed, or medium level to help people with problems get ready for living independently. Even so, people living in temporary accommodation are still homeless.

Rough Sleepers

126. The Government had two specific priorities when it first addressed the issue of homelessness. The first was to reduce the number of people sleeping rough in England by two-thirds. When the Prime Minister announced this target, the aspiration was that it should be met by 2002. In fact, it was met by December 2001. By 2004, it was calculated that the number of people sleeping rough each night was around 500, compared to 1,850 in 1998.[164] In London, the reduction is only 57% and the highest concentration of rough sleepers is still found there.[165] St Mungo's commented

"the continued success in keeping the numbers of rough sleepers relatively low means that the most visible and socially corrosive form of homelessness is more or less contained".[166]

SUSTAINING THE REDUCTION?

127. There are some reservations, both of the Government's methodology of counting rough sleepers and of the likelihood of this reduction in numbers being sustained. Shelter considered

"it is important to bear in mind the limitations of the methodology which only provides a snapshot covering the areas where street counts are conducted. This means that the actual numbers of rough sleepers at any one time is likely to be higher than the official figure. In some areas, multi-agency monitoring conducted by the statutory and voluntary sector provides a more comprehensive picture and estimates from the ODPM suggest that ten times that number sleep rough over the course of a year". [167]

Broadway told us

"although many rough sleepers are successfully assisted to make a sustained move from the streets, or find their own route away, for some it remains a difficult process. People are continuing to arrive on the streets of London, and some return to the streets despite being previously linked to services".[168]

The Yorkshire and Humberside Housing Forum stated

"Worrying though the current increase in homeless figures is, there is also concern that the problem is far worse than these figures may indicate. Official homeless statistics present a limited picture of the scale of homelessness and are particularly insensitive to the situation in rural areas. The approved headcount method of estimating rough sleeping is considered to wildly underestimate the scale of the problem and again, in rural areas, often denies the existence of rough sleeping at all".[169]

128. Westminster City Council told that us that for 15 rough sleepers moved off the streets in Westminster, 14 new ones arrived, some of which had never slept on the streets before.[170] Mr Terry Moore told us Westminster was exploring new ways of reducing the number.

"We do need to move from where we are at the moment, which is a system where we are actually providing services on the street and to a certain extent that does, we acknowledge, sustain rough sleepers where they are. What we are moving to from next April is a building-based approach by which there will be a safety net on the streets to make sure that the most vulnerable do still receive services, but that all other people will be signposted to various hostels where those services and a more detailed and better assessment can be carried out indoors".[171]

129. Several of our respondents are dubious whether the reduction can in fact be sustained beyond this initial period. On Westminster's figures, and despite all of the effort and resources that have gone in to achieving the rough sleepers' target, even a small reduction in people moving from the streets or a small increase in new arrivals would tip the balance so that numbers start rising again.

130. The Connection at St Martin's thought

"the post RSU [Rough Sleeper's Unit] position is less satisfactory. The Homelessness and Housing Directorate has a wide brief and there are concerns that it is moving away from its roots, and losing interest and/or concern about rough sleeping. This is particularly worrying in London as we have a fragmented, uncoordinated approach, which increasingly emphasises enforcement (anti-social behaviour) rather than care".[172]

131. Broadway reported comments from its clients which suggested that there is still work to do with rough sleepers. "Clients felt that some of the most vulnerable people on the streets are not receiving appropriate services. They felt that if you are able to help then you receive it, but some of the most vulnerable people are not able to do this".[173] St Mungo's warned

"lurking in the background is the spectre of rough sleeping numbers rising again. Even in economically benign conditions, the government target for reducing the numbers has not been met in central London. Should the economy take a down turn, numbers will rise, and it is clear that no contingency is in place. There should be one —but to be effective, it would have to be based on an honest appraisal of why the RSU succeeded, and part of the answer lies in its semi-detachment from ODPM".[174]

132. We welcome unreservedly the reduction in rough sleepers. The achievements to date have not been overstated and we congratulate the Government on meetings its targets ahead of time. It is however an area where constant vigilance and rapid responses are required. Indeed, it may be that those with most severe problems are those who are still on the streets. We recommend that the Government make further efforts to identify those long-term rough sleepers who have so far not sought assistance. We also recommend that the ODPM make an assessment of the work of the Rough Sleepers Unit, to identify its strengths and weaknesses, and ensure that it is ready to react rapidly should the number of rough sleepers start to rise again.

Bed and breakfast accommodation

133. The Government's second major target was the Homelessness and Housing Services Directorate's 2002 mission to reduce to zero, by March 2004, the number of homeless families with children in bed and breakfast accommodation, except in emergency situations where short periods in B&Bs up to six weeks might be allowed. ODPM allocated £35 million in 2002-03, and £15 million in 2003-04, to the Directorate to pursue this aim. In 2004-05, local authorities were allocated £45 million to sustain the lower figures, together with the rough sleepers reduction.

134. The Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) Order 2003 came into force in 2004, and means that local authorities can no longer claim to have discharged their statutory duty to house a homeless family with children if that family has been placed in a B&B for more than six weeks.[175] By March 2004, the number of homeless families with children in B&B accommodation had fallen by 99.3%. Only 17 local authorities did not meet the target, none of which were in London, where B&B use had been most prevalent.

CONTINUING USE OF BED AND BREAKFASTS

135. Despite such positive results, bed and breakfast accommodation is still used. Indeed, the crisis in temporary accommodation means that some areas have used bed and breakfast for the first time as an emergency measure. For instance, Ms Janice Samuels, of Salford City Council, told us that it had only began to use B&Bs in the last eighteen months.

"Where we would need to use it we want it to be for single people who we feel could cope quite well in what is unsupported accommodation within Salford. We much prefer to use the temporary supported accommodation provision that we have got".[176]

She felt it was best used in an emergency, for no more than three or four days. We agree that such use of B&B accommodation is acceptable, but it must be closely monitored.

136. Ms Janice Bennett, of South Ribble Borough Council, did not see a problem with using bed and breakfasts to house single young people.

"If it is good quality and is well managed it is a very useful source of temporary accommodation for people…They are well managed, there is 24-hour cover in them. No, they are not wonderful, but they are self-contained rooms with their own doors. A good quality, well managed bed and breakfast can be quite useful".[177]

She admitted that South Ribble was using B&Bs for single young people more than it had in the past.

"Until two years ago our annual bed and breakfast budget was £3,000 a year and probably in any one year we had two, three or four people that we placed in bed and breakfast. This year it is £27,000, not big in money terms, but you can see what the increase has meant to us as a local authority. We have probably between six and eight single people in bed and breakfast now at any one time".[178]

Mr Les Williamson, representing the Yorkshire and Humberside Housing Forum, told us of the significant problems Harrogate was experiencing.

"In Harrogate we were congratulated at our success in meeting the government's target of not keeping in bed and breakfast for longer than six weeks families with dependent children, but we responded by saying that that masks a real difficulty because in actual fact our bed and breakfast costs have gone up by 300 per cent for other categories of homeless presentations, particularly young single people with support needs…Two or three years ago we were spending £1,000 per year on bed and breakfast in Harrogate. Last year we spent £102,000 and that figure is likely to be breached again this year, so there are real concerns".[179]

Harrogate, like some other 'resort' towns, faces a particular problem as much of its housing has historically been used as bed and breakfast accommodation. Scarborough has similar difficulties.[180]

YOUNG PEOPLE

137. There appears to be a particular problem with the increased use of B&Bs for 16 and 17 year olds, the fastest growing group of homeless acceptances. At least 17 councils have been identified as placing more than 100 vulnerable people in B&Bs, including 16 and 17 year olds, since January 2004.[181] Centrepoint told us

"an unintended consequence of [the prohibition on housing families in B&Bs] may be an increase in the use of B&B for 16 and 17s, who can be moved into the spaces left behind by the families who have been prioritised for re-housing…paradoxically 16 and 17 year-olds who are with their families are being fast tracked out of B&B, as the accommodation is deemed unsuitable for them…Housing young people this age in unsuitable B&B accommodation for prolonged periods of time and without adequate support cannot be reconciled with the premise that local authorities are required to help them as they are too young to cope".[182]

Many single people need supported accommodation which most B&Bs cannot. We were glad to hear that South Ribble Borough Council, for one, recognise this and take measures to address the problem. Ms Bennett told us

"What we are doing is providing them with a floating support service so they are not left on their own. We do have almost daily visits from the floating support team and they are also encouraged and helped to help themselves by looking at possibly other ways of getting better accommodation quicker than they would if they were waiting for the traditional route through the local authority homeless route and being referred to an RSL partner".[183]

138. Even in areas where there is no alternative, B&B accommodation is only suitable for those who need little or no support. Sixteen to seventeen year olds should, as a matter of course, be housed in supported accommodation and it is unacceptable that they are being housed in conditions which, quite rightly, would be judged unsuitable if they were living with their family. We commend local authorities like South Ribble that are providing floating support services for those single homeless people housed in B&Bs. This is good practice. We recommend that the ODPM should amend the restriction on the use of B&B except in emergencies to include 16 and 17 year olds.

Hostels

139. Many homeless people find themselves living in hostels, particularly single homeless people. Hostels vary in size and nature; some are direct access, that is, they take people off the street, although often with a referral from a voluntary organisation. Direct access hostels are for short-term stays and provide a high level of support for tenants. Other hostels are filled by referrals from local authorities and are medium to long term stay. The Snow Hill Centre hostel, which we visited in Birmingham, was large, with 150 beds, and expected most residents to stay no longer than one year. Hostels can be specialist, in which case they often provide high support. Despite recent improvements, there are still a number of hostels which are little more than dormitory accommodation. Mr Nigel Parrington, of the Salvation Army Housing Association, told us that there were a significant number of hostels which had poor standards.[184] Mr Paul Cavadino of NACRO said "there is strong and understandable resistance to going to some types of hostel where people feel, possibly rightly, that they will be among people who are trying to deal in drugs and trying to intimidate them".[185]

Chart Two: Statutory homelessness: homeless households in temporary accommodation (quarterly)

Source: http://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/odpm_housing/documents/page/odpm_house_604144.xls

The 'silt-up'

140. Chart Two shows the number of homeless households in temporary accommodation in the first quarter of each year since 1992. It is widely recognised that the combination of an increasing number of applicants and non-statutorily homeless people, and a shortage of 'move-on' accommodation represents one of the greatest challenges facing local authorities.

This has led to the 'silting-up' of temporary accommodation across the country.

141. Temporary accommodation can mean first stage housing, such as direct access hostels and short stay units, or second stage, which includes most hostels and supported living units. Those whose homelessness applications are accepted will be provided with accommodation by the local authority. This will mean, for most people, privately leased flats for families, and hostel or B&B accommodation for single people. They have the right to be re-housed in local authority or housing association property. Those who have not approached the local authority, or whose application has been rejected, are usually living in hostels. They may be waiting for re-housing or simply not have anywhere else to go. Both of these housing streams are suffering from the acute lack of move-on accommodation.

142. We heard from Shelter that a recent survey had identified 30% of hostel residents as ready to move on with nowhere to go.[186] Homeless Link stated "the situation for people in hostels and other temporary accommodation is reaching crisis point and cannot continue".[187] Ms Jenny Edwards told us "We have recently surveyed the major hostels in London or those providing services to homeless people and we are finding that 43 per cent of the people in those hostels are ready to move on and are just waiting there".[188] Lord Rooker told us "we have got people flowing into temporary accommodation and not flowing out fast enough because of the shortage of affordable housing and there is a silting-up of the process there".[189] This in turn increases the pressure on local authorities to impose stricter gate-keeping procedures.

143. Homeless Link stated that another factor contributing to the crisis was the number of former rough sleepers who were now housed in hostels.[190] The Nottingham Hostels Liaison Group (HLG) pointed to the growing number of homeless people with high support needs who require specialist move on accommodation and supported housing which is unavailable.[191]

144. Long stays in hostels except in exceptional circumstances are to be discouraged. At the most basic level, it can be viewed as bed blocking. New tenants cannot move in and therefore remain in undesirable, even dangerous situations. HLG informed us that

"a recent survey of Nottingham City day centre and advice centre for homeless people found that in the period of a week these services saw 125 individuals who were not able to access an emergency bed that night".[192]

The tenants already in place are living long-term in hostels and other accommodation built for short stays. This has several disadvantages. The Salvation Army said

"many residents become deeply unhappy at this situation, particularly if they have made great efforts to recover from substance misuse problems but are unable to leave an environment where those problems are all too present".[193]

145. Centrepoint told us that young people find the experience "frustrating when they have worked hard to develop the confidence and skills to live independently. Furthermore young people can also regress: if they are not given the chance to live independently, they may lose the skills they have built up through failure to use them".[194] This is not just the case for the young. People of all ages can be discouraged by long hostel stays. We heard in Birmingham that those over 55 often suffer from spending long periods in hostels with younger people.[195] The ODPM told us "we know that over half of rough sleepers move out of first stage hostels as a result of either eviction or abandonment".[196] A contributory factor to this situation must be the lack of move-on accommodation. In order to maintain the reduction in the number of rough sleepers, ODPM needs to ensure that there is suitable first and second stage accommodation for them to move on to.

PROVISION OF TEMPORARY ACCOMMODATION

146. The Housing Corporation directs the building of permanent accommodation funded through the Approved Development Programme (ADP). The ADP provides homes for rent and temporary social housing. The amount of temporary social housing built under the ADP has fallen from 4,535 units in 1999-2000 to 623 in 2003-04 (a slight improvement on 561 in 2002-03).[197] As a result, the provision of temporary housing is outstripped by the increase in homelessness acceptances.

147. Current hostel provision does not reflect local demand, but is centred mainly in places with high populations. This leads to an unfair draining of resources in these areas, and forces people into city centres and away from their local areas in search of accommodation. Thus large towns and cities end up with disproportionately high percentages of homeless people to support (and potentially house permanently). The Salvation Army told us "service shortages are particularly acute in many rural areas where homelessness may be less visible but still prevalent".[198] Local authorities should be required to make an assessment of the temporary housing needed in their areas, based not only on the number of acceptances they are making, but also to ensure that the local need for hostel-type accommodation is also met. It is not acceptable for some areas to bear the financial burden of others because hostels are not being strategically built. We recommend that the Government use the demand identified by local authority homelessness strategies to draw up a national map of hostel need.

148. In December 2004, the Government announced funding of £92 million, from the 2004 Spending Review allocation, to be spent on improving hostels. It does not seem that this money is to spent on building new hostels. We welcome this move, but consider the investment to be far too low to tackle the problem of temporary accommodation bursting at the seams. It is with this problem in mind that we view recent comments from Mr Prescott, suggesting that people with a roof over their heads may not be homeless, with concern. It is imperative that homeless people are not 'redefined' as being no longer homeless as soon as they come off the streets.

LICENSING REGIMES

149. Nor is the quality of hostels guaranteed. We heard from the Salvation Army that all hostels run by Registered Social Landlords (RSLs), which includes many run by voluntary sector housing associations, must comply to standards set by the Housing Corporation. They are subject to inspection. Hostels outside this sector have no inspection regime, bar that of local authority Environmental Health Officers. There is no statutory definition of hostels; they are simply defined as houses of multiple occupation (HMOs). The Housing Act 2004 introduces a licensing scheme for HMOs of three storeys or more, occupied by five or more people. Local authorities also have been given discretion to extend licensing regimes where they see fit. In our 2003 Report, on the then draft Housing Bill, we expressed concern about this policy and recommended that the licensing regime be extended to all HMOs.[199] We are concerned that many hostels and other types of temporary accommodation may be substandard; given that stays in hostels are unacceptably long in many cases, the quality of accommodation should at least be high. We once more recommend that the Government introduce a registration and inspection system for all HMOs. In the meantime, we hope local authorities will make full use of their discretionary licensing powers.

HOSTELS WITH SPECIALIST SUPPORT

150. There is a shortage of hostels providing the specialist support services which many homeless people need. Facilities such as those run by the Foyer Federation for 16 and 17 year olds bring together many support services, for example a GP and housing advice officer, which may cost more than a simple hostel, but saves money elsewhere. Such high support accommodation can offer various services such as rehabilitation guidance, counselling, social events and education and training advice. There is a need for hostels designed for individual groups too. The Revolving Doors Agency told us

"Generalist housing providers are often unwilling to accommodate people who misuse drugs and/or alcohol or those who have mental health problems, because they will be unable to provide them with enough support to help them to sustain their tenancies. However, the supply of specialist housing is limited and even where it is available providers tend to only offer single issue care. This is inappropriate for many of our clients because of their multiple and complex needs."[200]

151. Local authority strategic plans should encompass specialist temporary accommodation. Those responsible for deciding what facilities are provided for homeless people should be long-sighted and think beyond merely putting a roof over heads.

152. Although many homeless people have problems which mean they are in need of support services, there are many who have become homeless and who require no help from their local authority besides a permanent home. It is inappropriate, and a waste of public money, if these people are being housed in temporary housing with funded support. At the most, a floating light support package only is needed. Local authorities should examine their housing supply to identify housing that may so far have been dismissed as unsupported, which could be used as move on accommodation for low or no support occupants.

TEMPORARY V PERMANENT?

153. For many years the case has been put that temporary accommodation costs more than the building of new permanent accommodation. Shelter estimated that the cost to the taxpayer of temporary accommodation per year is around £500 million.[201] The ALG hypothesised

"the present value of saving from replacing temporary with permanent housing for 30,000 families would be £3 billion. If numbers in temporary accommodation were assumed to grow at 3,000 pa and replaced with permanent housing the present value of long term savings would rise to £7.3 billion".[202]

Ms Genevieve Macklin of the ALG told us

"the Better Value Investment Model will produce 40 per cent more housing by just using the same amount of money, but using it on permanent housing instead of temporary accommodation".[203]

Lord Rooker agreed with this point, but raised the problem of capital investment.

"If you do not take a narrow accountant's look at the cost of building and everything else but take the totality for society, it is always going to be cheaper and I fully accept that. But that does require, to do that, programmes such as Spend to Save and capital investment as well".[204]

154. We recommend that, as part of its strategy for temporary accommodation, the Government should undertake a full cost benefit comparison of the provision of temporary and permanent housing, taking account not just of direct costs but also the wider implications for public expenditure (eg housing benefit and support services) and the wider costs for social provision as a whole.

155. We are deeply concerned about the 'silting-up' of temporary accommodation, which now houses such large numbers of people that it could be regarded as an alternative form of tenure. It threatens to derail the Government's achievements on homelessness. Of course, the main requirement is to ensure a much stronger supply of permanent homes so that people can move on from temporary accommodation as quickly as possible. The improvement in the quality of temporary accommodation brought about by the success of leasing from the private sector should not become an excuse for failing to re-house people permanently. If, as a society, we are unable to provide permanent homes for people, it is reasonable to expect that the temporary accommodation that is provided should at least meet people's needs.

156. The Government should produce a clear strategy for the future management of temporary accommodation. The strategy should set out how the Government intends to reduce the number of people in temporary accommodation in all its forms, and their length of stay. We believe it should be a priority of the Government to ensure that the right amount of accommodation is available where it is needed for those, mainly single vulnerable people, waiting in B&Bs and hostels, and that the quality of provision is improved and adequate support services are provided. In particular, use of B&B accommodation should be phased out, starting with 16 and 17 year olds.

---

164   Ev 169 Back

165   Ev 175 Back

166   Ev 127 Back

167   Ev 188 Back

168   Ev 65 Back

169   Ev 24 Back

170   Q 110 Back

171   Q 108 Back

172   Ev 35 Back

173   Ev 57 Back

174   Ev 127-128 Back

175   Ev 175 Back

176   Q 170 Back

177   Q 167 Back

178   Q 171 Back

179   Q 175 Back

180   Q 175 Back

181   Ev 113 (Community Care Magazine, July 2004)  Back

182   Ev 113 Back

183   Q 171 Back

184   Q 294 Back

185   Q 301 Back

186   Ev 189 Back

187   Ev 201 Back

188   Q 238 Back

189   Q 395 Back

190   Ev 199 Back

191   Ev 95 Back

192   Ev 95 Back

193   Ev 141 Back

194   Ev 113 Back

195   Information gathered on an informal visit to Birmingham Back

196   Ev 175 Back

197   Ev 178 Back

198   Ev 141 Back

199   The Draft Housing Bill, 10th Report of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister: Housing, Planning, Local Government and the Regions Committee, Session 2002-03 (HC 751), paras 51-52 Back

200   Ev 158 Back

201   Ev 188 Back

202   HC 61-II, Ev 86 Back

203   Q 79 Back

204   Q 432 Back

---

Prepared 27 January 2005