Homelessness policy and practice has been transformed by new managerialism and decentralisation. Decentralisation initially reversed the centralisation of new managerilism. Decentralisation is now leading to evolution of place based approaches to homelessness. Place-based approaches have the potential to provide more person centred, systematic and outcome based approaches to reducing homelessness. Find out more about the evolution of place based approaches in London.

1. Adam Stephenson
Homelessness policy in England:
the importance of place
12 April 2017
ISPHERE Seminar, Heriot Watt University, Edinburgh
Institute for Social Policy, Housing and Equalities Research

2. Lost worlds of welfare: Local homelessness systems in England
‘National’ welfare services
• National welfare services based on Marshal’s ‘social citizenship’.
• Social citizenship guaranteed equal rights to a basic welfare: health,
education, housing and social insurance (Revi, 2014).
• ‘Uniform’ welfare services mass produced by large departments
• Services users imagined as ‘clients’
• Confidence in ‘national welfare’ began to decline in 1970s
• Centralised welfare services delivered greater levels of spatial
inequality than any other European country (Martin et al., 2015)
Homelessness policy in England: the importance of place

3. Lost worlds of welfare: Local homelessness systems in England
Public service reform
Three strategies of public service reform:
1. Privatisation
• Extend markets
• Private provision, commodification, introduction of quasi-markets
• Service users reimagined as ‘consumers’
2. New managerialism
• Self improvement
• Professional management, performance measures, value-for-money, customer
focus
• Service users reimagined as ‘customers’
3. Decentralisation
• Extend democracy
• Place based management, integration, reduction in bureaucracy
• Service users reimagined as ‘citizens’
Institute for Social Policy, Housing and Equalities ResearchHomelessness policy in England: the importance of place

4. Lost worlds of welfare: Local homelessness systems in England
English decentralisation in practice
Reverse ‘centralisation’ of New
managerialism’
• New managerialism improved public
services during early New Labour
• ‘New managerialism’ failing by late
2000s
• ‘Targetology’ – chasing targets
rather than improving services or
outcomes (Rouse, 1993)
• ‘Gaming’ or ‘working the system’ –
delivering soft targets (Pollit, 199
• ‘Perverse consequences’ (Public
Administration Select Committee,
2003)
• Police forces falsely reported
detection of 1000s of crimes
(Guardian, 1999)
• NHS Trusts altered waiting lists
(NAO, 2001)
Place based health (reform): Manchester
• Health and social care budget devolved to Greater
Manchester Combined Authority
“We are seeking to join up community services
with social care, mental health and primary care
in order to provide the integrated offer that is
necessary, not only to support a transformation
in our population’s health through prevention
and early intervention but in effect, to reduce the
demand for services in our hospitals. That is how
we see this strategy.” (Sir Howard Bernstein)
• Aims to improve the performance the ‘fragmented
health and social care systems’ through ‘service
and system change’ and ‘leadership and
governance arrangements’ (GMCA, 2015:6, 8, 13)
Homelessness policy in England: the importance of place

5. Lost worlds of welfare: Local homelessness systems in England
Homelessness policy reform
• National homelessness policy: statutory framework
• Housing (Homeless Persons) Act 1977
• provides ‘settled’ accommodation to prescribed groups
• provides no ‘meaningful’ assistance to everyone else
• Academic and policy research focused on ‘policy failure’ since 1980s
• Venn (1985); Greve et al (1986)
• Dobie et al (2014); Gousy (2016)
• Wider public service reforms (new managerialism and decentralisation)
have influenced evolution of homelessness policy in England
• Government to governance
• “radical change” (Pleace and Quilgars, 2003:14)
Homelessness policy in England: the importance of place

6. Lost worlds of welfare: Local homelessness systems in England
New managerialism
‘Prevention focused approach’
• ‘Choice’
• Housing options
• Choice based lettings
• PRS access
• LHA
• National targets
• 1998 target to cut rough sleeping by
two-thirds within 3years
• 2002 pledge to end non emergency use
of B&B
• Ring fenced funding
• Homelessness Prevention Grant
• Supporting People
• Best practice
• Guidance
• Special Advisors
• Beacon Councils, Regional Champions
Supporting People
• National performance framework
• Quality Assessment Framework
• Annual returns
• Ring-fenced funding
• “housing related supported services”
• Value for money
• duty to ensure value for money
• Prescribed governance
• SP Administering Authorities
• ‘lead officer’
• commissioning board
Homelessness policy in England: the importance of place

7. Lost worlds of welfare: Local homelessness systems in England
Decentralisation
Place based Initiatives
• Rough Sleepers Initiatives (1990)
• Central London only
• Partnership between Government,
Local Government and voluntary
sector
• Extended to Bristol and Brighton
• (Pre)Homelessness Action
Programme (1997)
• RSI funding extended to 22 places
• Homeless Mentally Ill Initiative
(12places)
Homelessness policy in England: the importance of place
RS205 Initiative (2009)
Reduce entrenched rough seeping
Developed by DCLG, GLA, and LA
Flexible, targeted, monitored
No Second Night Out (2011)
Devolved RS to GLA
‘establish a pan-London approach’
Local accountability to improve services
London Social Impact Bond (2012)
‘Navigator model’ & ‘system change’
Shift from services to outcomes

8. Lost worlds of welfare: Local homelessness systems in England
Decentralisation
• Reform of Local Government
• Strong and Prosperous
Communities (2006)
• Comprehensive Performance
Assessment (CPA) replaced by
Comprehensive Area Assessment
(CAA)
• Service improvements via
partnership between (local) public
services
• Reform of Supporting People
• Independence and Opportunity
(2007)
• National performance framework
scrapped
• Ring fence lifted
• Reform of ‘prevention focused
approach’
• Targets scrapped circa 2008
• Total Place (2010)
• Funding localisation
• Best practice scrapped
Place based approaches
• More than a roof (2002)
• ‘people factors’ & ‘place factor’
• ‘join up policy’ locally
• Enhanced Housing Options Trailblazer (2009)
• Integrate homelessness, benefits,
employment & training
• Making Every Contact Count (2012)
• “locally designed integrated services” (p5)
• Help for Single Homelessness (2014)
• ‘integrated approaches’ across geographical
boundaries
• Addressing complex needs (2015)
• Place based commissioning
• Homelessness Prevention Trailblazers
(2016)
• “local areas to take a systems, outcomes and
person-centred approach to reducing
homelessness” (p6)
Homelessness policy in England: the importance of place

9. Lost worlds of welfare: Local homelessness systems in England
Place based approaches in practice
People’s Gateway, Croydon
• Person/family centred approach to welfare and housing:
“… I know Croydon have taken a Gateway approach, which is a holistic approach of looking at
homelessness… The gateway and welfare model… not just in identifying someone’s homeless
needs, but welfare needs, training needs, employment needs… (Metro level policy manager,
statutory sector)
• Integrates housing options and statutory homelessness, DHP, Council Tax Support (CTS),
income maximisation, welfare reform, Universal Credit Support (UCS), adult social care
financial assessments, blue badge assessment and bereavement services.
• The whole person approach allows local authorities to “join up these services in order to
deliver more efficient and outcome centred customer journeys” (Localis, 2016:16).
• Croydon analysed 60,000 records across five services - 20,000 known to three or more.
“We looked at it from the perspective of how much money where those households costing us and how
much money did they owe us. Through that lenses you realise quite quickly that all of our emergency
accommodation customers were costing us a lot of money directly, but equally they owed us money as well.
What it suggested was actually this feels wrong, because the people who are collecting the money are going
at this hammer and tongs and trying to make sure they’re delivering their KPIs. The people who are trying
to support are just keeping them in a buoyant position”
Homelessness policy in England: the importance of place

10. Lost worlds of welfare: Local homelessness systems in England
Place based approaches in practice
Greenhouse, Hackney
• Multi-agency hub for single homeless people
• Place based commissioning (Hackney Council & City & Hackney CCG)
• “So if someone comes in clearly after hearing their story and their main issues is
around their health, that’s where they get triaged to. But we here to help with some
their issues around maintaining their accommodation, looking at their level of debt,
helping them reduce their rent repayments, that kind of stuff.” (Metro level,
voluntary sector)
• “Now the beauty of that environment is that people feel more comfortable going
there, it’s not the stark housing options council office and we can offer a whole
variety of interventions including health interventions that illustrates and probably
reflects the fact that we do need holistic response to peoples homelessness. It’s not
going to be a simple issue of needing somewhere to live.” (Metro level, voluntary
sector)
• Delivers a range of ‘metrics’: reducing rough sleeping, homeless prevention, income
maximisation, debt, ETE
Homelessness policy in England: the importance of place

11. Lost worlds of welfare: Local homelessness systems in England
Place based approaches in practice
The Point, Greenwich
• Multi-agency hub for 16 to 19 year olds. Based on St Basil’s Positive Pathway:
“Young people have suitable homes they can afford, are in work and have support if
they need it” (St Basils, 2015)
• ETE, housing options, housing support, personal development, sexual health services, drug and
alcohol support, positive activities, volunteering
• 1st Base, Housing Options and Support:
“There are some local authorities with a unified approach; a range of partners;
some statutory; some third sector; some housing association all working
together and doing different activities… but they’re all working to an agreed set
of process and systems.” (National actor, voluntary sector)
• Fragmentation:
“… they’re passing them between Children’s Services and Housing. Passing 16
& 17 years olds between each other; arguing the toss about who is
responsible… They just don’t work together. All they do is complain about each
other.” (National actor, voluntary sector)
Homelessness policy in England: the importance of place

12. Lost worlds of welfare: Local homelessness systems in England
Place based approaches in practice
Social care integration and de-institutionalisation, Lambeth
• Lambeth Council, Mental Health Trust and CCG
• Early intervention:
“decided that they had to be a different way of offering mental health services, which would have
the benefit of helping people stay well and… improve the quality of their life and avoid
homelessness.” (Metro-level, voluntary sector).
• De-institutionalisation:
“Typically, some of great success we’re having with rehabilitation programme moving people out
of hospital beds or out of registered care homes and into the community, what happens there is
you get somebody into a flat in the community and because they have had mental health issues
and they have links with social care, you know you can get a package of support and it can be as
high as £350 per week to give them personal assistance support. £350 per week and maybe a rent
of £350-£400 per week, so maybe £750 per week is a lot of money. You see how much they’re
paying in a care home; £1100 per week and you find you’re saving £400 per week and the quality
of their lives are better. Everybody is happy and the commissioners are happy to too. Its shocks
me to see that that we are letting people stay in circumstances which are far too
institutionalised…” (Metro level, voluntary sector)
Homelessness policy in England: the importance of place

13. Lost worlds of welfare: Local homelessness systems in England
Questions?
Homelessness policy in England: the importance of place