The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER THREE: COVERAGE OF THE MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

82. The Ministerial Statement must set out the measures Scottish Ministers and local authorities have taken, are taking and intend to take to ensure that local authorities can reasonably be expected to fulfil their homelessness duties without distinguishing between priority and non-priority households. This section of the consultation paper identified demographic change, preventative activity, sustainable solutions, availability of affordable accommodation and the range of accommodation options available as key areas in this regard. The paper set out measures being taken by the Executive and local authorities to prevent homelessness and reduce repeat homelessness, but also requested views on any additional actions which should be prioritised as a means of preventing homelessness and ensuring more sustainable solutions. Views on the current barriers to rehousing homeless people in housing association and privately rented properties and suggestions as to how greater diversity could be achieved were also sought.

83. The consultation paper set out the areas which it is intended the statement will cover, and identified specific actions in each. The areas identified are:

• amending the homeless legislation to abolish priority need, and allow changes regarding intentionality and local connection;
• producing guidance and drawing on good practice;
• preventing homelessness;
• housing supply - ownership / social rented/ private rented;
• housing quality;
• housing support; effective sustainable solutions; and
• gathering information and monitoring progress.

84. Four questions were set out at the end of the section. Responses to questions 4 and 5 are considered first:

Q4) Are there other policy areas which are relevant to the 2012 target which should be considered? What are the priorities?

Q5) Are there specific actions which would contribute to the 2012 target which the statement should contain? In particular are there additional actions required to ensure homelessness is prevented, and sustainable solutions achieved for homeless people and local communities?

85. Question 4 was answered in 43 of the responses. There was a high degree of consensus among responses on the policy areas relevant to the 2012 target. In order of frequency, those most commonly cited were the Supporting People programme, Housing Benefit rules and regulations, Anti-social Behaviour legislation, private sector lettings, and the Right to Buy. Other frequently cited areas included:

• Health policy including mental and physical health, drug and alcohol misuse;
• Discharge of homelessness duty for Local Authorities;
• Employment, training and vocational opportunities (and the Employability Framework);
• Funding, including the Strategic Investment Framework and Comprehensive Spending Review;
• Planning policy and land use regulations;
• Migrant workers;
• Allocations policy;
• Social work and other care services, children and young people policy;
• Use of section 5 referrals and nominations;
• Education, prevention and tenancy sustainment; and
• Communities Scotland's development programme.

86. Some respondents felt that the priorities relevant to the 2012 target had been set out in the Scottish Executive's publication "Homes for Scotland's People", including actions to: increase the supply of social rented homes and low-cost homes; increase the supply of affordable rural housing, ensure the Supporting People programme addresses the needs of vulnerable homeless households to assist them sustain a tenancy and prevent homelessness; and actions to address Community Regeneration.

87. There was no clear indication of consensus on the top priorities in terms of policy areas, with all of the above seen as important. However, areas specifically identified as priorities were: additional accommodation, Supporting People funding and support services, prevention work, Housing Benefit issues, Anti-social Behaviour legislation and the private sector.

88. Particular comments made with regard to these policy areas illustrate the issues raised:

Additional Accommodation

The main priority has to be provision of additional accommodation. ( APN 3)

The key policy area is the provision of additional affordable housing to address the increasing demand, whilst aiming to ensure mixed communities. ( APN 16)

Supporting People

Local Authorities need long term financial commitment here, to ensure that housing support services are well resourced in order to meet the increased duties placed on them through Housing and Homelessness legislation. ( APN 10)

Supporting People funding is the major funding source for Women's Aid groups to temporary accommodation and in several areas groups' funding has been reduced resulting in cuts in service provision. ( APN 38)

Housing Benefit

89. Both respondents to the consultation paper and members present at regional seminars commented on specific aspects of Housing Benefit rules and regulations which they saw as unhelpful in meeting the needs of homeless households and enabling local authorities to discharge their duties. Access to the private rented sector was seen to be particularly difficult for those in receipt of Housing Benefit due to the unwillingness of landlords to take on such tenants, possibly due to potential problems associated with the administration of benefit. There was a concern that introducing direct payment of Housing Benefit would exacerbate this problem. Difficulties of accessing private rented accommodation were thought to be particularly severe for young people under the age of 25 due to restrictions on benefits and single room rents restrictions. Ex-offenders who have served in excess of 13 week sentences were also seen as a particularly vulnerable group. There was a view that it should be possible to pay Housing Benefit on two homes, in order to enable a new home to be suitably equipped before a tenant moves in, and thus to ensure sustainable moves from temporary accommodation and to avoid a situation where tenants are in rent areas before the tenancy has even begun. In addition, in situations where project staff are left to collect arrears direct from residents they are working with to support it was felt this made projects unofficial collecting agencies for the Local Authority with potential negative impact on resident /staff relationships.

Anti-social behaviour

90. Various concerns were raised about the compatibility of anti-social behaviour and homelessness legislation. Requests were made for clearer guidance in this respect and on balancing the need to house households with complex support needs and challenging behaviour and the use of anti-social behaviour orders. It was suggested that the 'Breaking the Cycle' pilot project could provide useful examples of work in this area, and that the funding stream for this work needs to be extended. There were concerns that duties to house those with challenging behaviour could have negative impacts on other households in the area, and that it was necessary to make clear the responsibilities that are owed to this client group, and to address issues of stigma and negative attitudes towards homeless people:

'I would suggest that the Minister needs to make it clear that agencies have to accept their responsibilities to this client group [homeless people with complex and multiple needs] and produce clear strategies or plans that identify how they are going to respond to this demand. ( APN 25).

The Private Rented Sector

91. Again the need for access to information on the size and availability of accommodation in the private sector was raised. There were also calls for consideration of ways to facilitate the use of the private sector in discharging authorities' duties to a homeless household. There was support for allowing the use of Short Assured Tenancies in the private sector, and also for finding ways to strengthen the security of tenancies in this sector.

92. Additional policy areas identified were the Crofter Housing Grant Scheme, domestic abuse, community ownership programme, fuel poverty and Eco-Homes standards, criminal justice, council tax rates, rural diversification strategies and issues surrounding the developing choice agenda and introduction of Common Housing Registers.

Common themes

Joint working

93. Within the discussion of relevant policy areas it is possible to identify some common themes. The need for greater joint working on homelessness was a commonly held view, with emphasis placed on the connections between homelessness, health and social work / care services and with drug and alcohol addiction services. There was a perceived need for other services to do more to address the needs of clients accessing their services who were homeless - in effect for the 'mainstreaming' of homelessness within other policy areas. This was also requested within government departments. In relation to this, requests were made for the Ministerial Statement to incorporate social work strategies which deal with vulnerable adults, looked after children and children at risk, and to set out the responsibilities of other organisations and departments in tackling homelessness. The Health and Homelessness Action plans and Standards were also cited.

94. There was a suggestion that the Executive should consider legislation to clearly define Social Work and Health responsibilities to homeless service users ( APN 15), other respondents made similar comments:

I would suggest that the Minister call upon the Chief Executive of the Local Authority to take on the responsibility of developing a corporate response to homelessness in their respective areas. ( APN 25)

The Ministerial Statement should acknowledge that the overlap between homelessness, community care and health policies is fundamental. ( APN 29)

COSLA considers a key priority to be increasing the cross-agency and cross sector responsibilities of tackling homelessness. Further enhancement of the partnership working of all key stakeholders is essential, but so too is the full appreciation of the role that all sectors of the housing market must play, including the private rented sector, all of the social rented sector, and to a lesser extent, the owner-occupied sector. ( APN 42)

95. Many respondents also made suggestions in the various policy areas they identified, these overlap with responses to question 5 on specific actions required to contribute to the 2012 target and are therefore considered together with answers to question 5 (which was answered in 43 of the responses).

Supply

96. In particular, there was a widely held view that additional affordable accommodation and additional funding for housing support would be needed to meet the target. Concerning the supply of affordable housing, requests were made for a commitment by the Scottish Executive to provide affordable housing for example, 'to provide x number of houses on a year on year basis' ( APN 3) and for targets to be set for using new accommodation for homeless people. Similarly, there was a view that the needs of homeless people should be considered in all regeneration and new-build developments and that specific targets should be contained in all development briefs, and approved by Communities Scotland ( APN 11). There was also a view that the next Comprehensive Spending Review must prioritise the building of new homes if the 2012 target was to be met.

97. Other comments relating to the supply of housing addressed ways of more effectively using existing stock. These included requests to amend council tax guidance to allow the use of second homes discount to acquire existing properties, for a strategy to be developed to encourage private investment in the private rented sector, for the use of Short Assured Tenancies to be allowed as a means of discharging Local Authorities' duties through the private sector, and for strategies to encourage private landlords to use Assured Tenancies, or otherwise increase the security of their lets. Some of those attending regional seminars were concerned that the registration of private landlords, and the extension of the Local Housing Allowance ( LHA) scheme, could cause private landlords to leave the market, however, there was also a view that the private rented sector would potentially be a good option for housing, if current barriers could be broken down.

98. In addition, strategies to encourage or ensure that sufficient lets by RSLs will go to homeless applicants were requested by both respondents to the consultation paper and those attending regional seminars, including requests for a commitment by the Executive to legislate to ensure all RSLs accommodate homeless people. The need to address attitudinal issues among RSL landlords was also raised. There was a view that they needed to review their allocations policy to give reasonable preference to homeless applicants and that better service level agreements needed to be put into place between local authorities and housing associations.

99. Planning and land issues were also seen as relevant to the ability to provide affordable housing with requests for processes to be simplified so that land could be brought forward more quickly. The need to address infrastructure requirements, particularly regarding Scottish Water, was seen as a connected issue. In addition to more general comments on the proposed modernisation of the planning system and constraints on land supply, some specific comments were made regarding planning and infrastructure at the regional seminars. There was a view that Local Authorities were unable to compete with others on the price of land and an exploration of the potential of 'zoning' for affordable housing was suggested. A 'surprising' number of objections to plans for new builds in Right to Buy areas was also noted. There was also a view that Local Authorities were 'not allowed' to build and that they should have the same rights as Registered Social Landlords in this respect, there was also a view that Local Authorities would build houses more cheaply than RSLs. In relation to issues concerning infrastructure, it was suggested that Scottish Water should be made a Community Planning partner.

100. Right to Buy was again raised as a policy that has negatively impacted on the ability of Local Authorities to address housing need by a number of respondents. There was a request for the Executive "to fully research the impact that Right to Buy has on individual local authority areas and restrict, abolish or suspend as appropriate" ( APN 10). The extension of Right to Buy in 2012 to RSL tenants was predicted to increase pressure on social landlords. There was support for the suspension of Right to Buy in areas with pressured area status, and for the extension of Right to Buy to be cancelled. There was a view that:

The Homelessness legislative agenda cannot be sustained, if as is presently the case, Right to Buy Sales outstrip new build of social rented housing. ( APN 10)

Support

101. Regarding funding and provision of support services, the need for an integrated approach and for the roles and responsibilities of different services to be clearly recognised was reiterated. The need to ensure an adequate level of funding through the Supporting People programme was raised again. There was a common view that meeting the support needs of homeless households would require additional funding from the Executive. There was a perceived need for significant investment in intensively supported accommodation. There was a view that funding for services needed to be long term and clearly identified in order to allow effective delivery and planning. One respondent commented that:

No additional actions will be required, other than ensuring the tasks currently set out within the Homelessness Strategies in relation to increasing supply, prevention of homelessness and providing sustainable solutions for homeless people are achieved. However without adequate levels of long term funding, these objectives may not be achieved. ( APN 19)

Stigma

102. The need to address the stigma of homelessness, with education and awareness raising campaigns was a recurrent theme in responses. There was a view that a national campaign may be necessary due to the potential for the abolition of priority need to be seen as having implications for mainstream waiting list applicants. Addressing stigma attached to homelessness within RSLs was seen as a specific need. Specific action to address the stigma attached to mental health was also seen as relevant, as was action in relation to homeless people who have drug or alcohol misuse problems. A suggestion was made that those with experience of successful engagement with people with substance misuse issues should be commissioned to provide training in best practice to help overcome some of the negative attitudes to such people ( APN 4).

Prevention

103. Prevention activity was also a consistent theme, with suggestions that a duty to deliver wider prevention outcomes for Local Authorities should be monitored by Communities Scotland as part of their inspection process, and that all social landlords should demonstrate the outcomes of their prevention strategies during inspection and regulation visits. It was thought that guidance on what constitutes a successful prevention outcome would be required. Another suggestion was for national guidance to promote a corporate approach to preventing homelessness in all Local Authorities and to detail these in Homelessness Strategies. In relation to tenancy sustainment, better monitoring of outcomes was also seen as necessary, and again clear guidance and definitions were requested. Education on leaving home and homelessness was also identified as an early prevention measure that could be included in the school curriculum. There was a view that access to a national database or website of best practice on prevention in Scotland would be invaluable for the development and implementation of local services.

104. The development of employment, voluntary and training opportunities was seen as key by some respondents to ensuring sustainable solutions and to addressing the wider needs of homeless households. The Executive was asked to ensure a clear long term funding stream for the Employability Framework.

105. Many specific activities were suggested in responses to questions 4 and 5, these are summarised in the list below:

• In-depth research in relation to applicants who become homeless because families or friends can no longer accommodate them;
• Changing the Key Performance Indicator on Rent Arrears so that local authorities who work with tenants in arrears without evicting them are recognised, rather than penalised, for their positive work in preventing homelessness;
• The extension of Housing Support to those who are not tenants (i.e. other family members);
• Recognition of the role of Community Health Partnerships in preventing the determinants of homelessness and the response to the needs of homeless people;
• Monitoring the impact of actions already taken to improve housing supply;
• Revamping Rent Deposit/Guarantee schemes to include those not on benefits;
• Give sufficient time for people in temporary accommodation to find other alternatives;
• Making the Code of Guidance mandatory;
• Commission comprehensive resettlement practice guidance and associated training;
• Developing more robust protocols between Homelessness Strategies and Drug and Alcohol Teams;
• Wider roll-out for mediation schemes which have been proved effective elsewhere;
• Housing Benefit reforms (as above);
• Reviewing the effects of setting targets, e.g. the impact of the expectation to make a decision in 28 days on preventative activity;
• Clear guidance on use of Private Sector leasing;
• Increasing resources to Social Work Department and Health partners;
• Setting clear targets and timescales for Local Authorities in regard to the abolition of priority need;
• Recognising and addressing the common root causes of homelessness;
• Ensuring homelessness strategies are tied in with the Scottish Executive's other work aiming to reduce social exclusion;
• Training in mental health awareness to Community Casework Teams to enable them to recognise early warning signs or risks of mental health problems;
• Targets to monitor and reduce the number of tenants / owner occupiers evicted in an area;
• Consider restricting evictions for rent arrears to cases where balance is more than ten times the net rent for the previous year;
• Making funds available for 'tenancy rescue';
• Introducing 'spend to save' funding;
• Encouraging prisoners to sublet their properties in their absence;
• Considering the extension of 'key worker' schemes as developed in London and the South East;
• Amending the Code of Guidance to reflect the right that a woman experiencing domestic abuse would have to choose to be housed elsewhere or to remain in her home and for the ex-partner to be housed elsewhere;
• Commissioning research to identify why exclusion orders do not currently work and making recommendations as to how they could be effectively implemented;
• Action to ensure Section 5 Referrals and nomination arrangements work more consistently and effectively;
• Endorsing and promoting revised guidance 'Dealing with Domestic Abuse' for Housing Associations; and
• Looking to how long term financial support can be given to helping people access furniture when moving into permanent accommodation.

Q6) What are the barriers to diverse housing outcomes for homeless people and how can these be overcome?

106. Barriers to diverse housing outcomes identified in the responses can be summarised under five categories: stock, stigma, issues relating to the private rented sector, housing benefit, and tenancy types allowed to discharge duty and support needs. In addition, the short-term nature of funding streams, planning and land use regulations and infrastructure issues were also identified as barriers as were specific issues regarding the accommodation of ex-offenders and the grant level under the new Crofter Housing Scheme.

Stock

107. Stock issues were a shortage of social rented stock, a mismatch of available stock to needs in terms of location, state of repair, size etc, a lack of single person stock and, in Glasgow, of larger housing stock, the development of too much stock for particular needs, the concentration of voids in hard to let areas, the affordability of housing, high rents in the private sector, the impact of the Right to Buy policy, and the existence of second and holiday homes, especially in rural areas. In addition, there was a common view of a lack of information on lets by RSLs and of an under use of section 5 referrals and nomination agreements.

Stigma

108. Issues identified in relation to stigma were 'Nimbyism', negative attitudes towards homeless people among the media, general public and private sector, the stigma of mental health issues, the creation of 'ghettos' through a service culture that can encourage homeless people only to mix with other homeless people, for example through the provision of specialist services and discriminatory attitudes in Local Authorities towards those with disabilities which can prevent disabled people being offered accommodation in the private sector.

Private sector

109. There was a view that landlords in the private rented sector could be reluctant to house those on benefits, and that the introduction of the Local Housing Allowance and direct payments could exacerbate this. The use of Short Assured Tenancies, as above, was seen to limit the potential for using this sector. Private sector stock was also thought to be inadequate in terms of both quality and quantity.

Housing Benefit

110. The rules and regulations regarding Housing Benefit, as discussed above, were seen as further barriers to diverse housing solutions.

Inflexibility of discharge options

111. There was also a view that there was inflexibility in the types of tenancy acceptable in discharging an authority's duty towards a homeless applicant. This issue was raised both in relation to the use of Short assured tenancies in the private sector, and in relation to the provision of long-term supported accommodation and shared housing options.

Support needs

112. There was a view that there is a lack of recognition of the complexity of needs of some homeless applicants, and that both the level and complexity of needs of applicants were likely to increase with expanding eligibility. The challenging behaviour of some applicants was also seen as a barrier to housing as was a reduction in Supporting People funding.

Solutions

113. Solutions to the barriers identified often overlapped with the issues identified in relation to questions 4 and 5. With regard to stock issues, the following suggestions were made:

• Resources for new builds and requiring new build programmes to include more new build of single person homes;
• Increasing investment as set out in "Homes for Scotland's People";
• Targeting the Communities Scotland Development programme at the social rented sector;
• Resources for Local Authorities' regeneration programmes to address mismatch issues;
• Excluding any social rented provision in areas of shortfall from Right to Buy; and
• Providing sufficient funding towards SHQS.

114. Prevention activity was also identified as having the potential to reduce pressure on housing supply. Developing the prevention agenda and requiring RSLs to demonstrate prevention work were suggested and there was a view that earlier intervention work was needed. Greater coordination of services and the funding and strategic coordination of housing information and advice were also seen as aiding prevention. There was a view that an analysis of the circumstances and preferences of those whom prevention activity may be targeted at, including both homeless households and those on the general waiting list, was needed. Various initiatives to develop housing options could then be piloted and good practice identified and shared.

115. With regard to the use of the private rented sector the following were suggested:

• Encouraging the use of Assured Tenancies, through e.g. use of rent deposit /guarantee schemes;
• Encouraging imaginative ways of increasing security in the private sector (through, for example, long-term tenancies and safety net solutions);
• Allowing more flexible housing options including use of Short Assured Tenancies and shared housing (not just private sector);
• Publicising successful tenancy work;
• Lobbying for changes to Benefits rules; and
• Providing guidance on the use of this sector.

116. In relation to tackling the stigma attached homelessness respondents recommended: education on housing and homelessness to remove stigma; a national education programme for schools, communities and agencies; and stressing the positive futures for homeless people (learning from 'see-me' campaign re mental health)

117. With regard to support needs/support packages, secure and long-term funding for support was required. There was also a view that greater use of the voluntary sector could be made in the provision of support.

118. Allowing greater flexibility in the types of tenure which would discharge an authority's duty was identified as helpful in relation to increasing use of the private sector and in allowing for more diverse and supported housing outcomes.

119. Other solutions identified included:

• Amending Section 5 so that it included non-priority cases;
• Greater joint working on homelessness including closer partnership between local authorities and the private sector;
• Altering the planning system and increasing local authority powers with regard to planning and development;
• Providing longer-term funding and increasing investment in the areas identified in Homes for Scotland's People;
• Tightening the definition of a 'reasonable offer' in the Code of Guidance;
• Mainstreaming funding for, and expanding, Rent Deposit schemes and national support to provide better facilities and / or resources for rent deposit /guarantee or bond schemes to overcome the difficulties of administering schemes in rural areas;
• Encouragement of moves from under-occupied accommodation; and
• Ensuring that Anti-social Behaviour legislation and Housing Benefit legislation compliment rather than conflict with homelessness legislation.

120. In addition there was a view that the Scottish Executive could play a useful role in aiding work with the Scottish Prison Service around accommodation for ex-offenders.

121. With regard to Housing Benefit, solutions identified were for DWP to consider extending the power to pay Housing Benefit direct to landlords in circumstances where the tenant is considered to be vulnerable, so that it includes homeless persons; reviewing the single room rent restriction; reflecting anticipated increases in the demand for housing from households in need of Housing Benefit in the amount of Discretionary Housing Fund allocated to Local Authorities; and taking account of the additional costs and resources that will be required in administering Housing Benefit by local authorities. In relation to people under the age of 25 and students in full time education, one respondent commented:

We support the current discussions between the Executive and the Department for Work and Pensions to improve the situation for these groups. We would welcome a commitment in the Minister's Statement to accelerate the joint-discussion to find a positive way forward to assist people with rent support. ( APN 46)

122. There was also a view that it would be beneficial for Communities Scotland to produce quarterly information on RSL lets and for the obligations of RSLs to be strengthened in relation to:

• The provision of advice and information;
• The demonstration of preventative work and the impact it is having on tenancy sustainment rates; and
• A more robust approach towards compliance with Section 5 duties.

Q7) Could existing funding streams be used more effectively to prevent and tackle homelessness? How could this be done?

123. Thirty-eight respondents answered this question. Several respondents were of the view that existing funding streams were stretched to full capacity, though some also believed that they could be used more effectively. It was commonly believed that more effective use of existing funding streams did not alter the need for additional funding which would be required. In some cases, the provision of specific additional funding was thought to allow for the more effective use of existing funding streams. In addition to addressing the specific issue raised in the question, respondents also made more general points in relation to funding.

124. A recurrent view was that the short-term nature of current funding was detrimental to the effective provision and planning of services, and that longer-term funding, linked to the 5 year cycle of Homelessness Strategies, and committed at least until 2012 would be necessary to reflect the long term goal 2012 represents. In addition, a common suggestion was that funding streams for different services and areas needed to be more closely linked, and that, in keeping with homelessness being taken on board as a core area of work in other services, funding for homelessness should be identified from these budgets. In this respect, there was a view that homelessness must be a central consideration of the current development of the Strategic Investment Framework. There was also a request for clearer guidance to, and encouragement of, Local Authorities to allocate resources to support the health contribution to homelessness work.

125. There was also a view that a clearer steer and more transparent basis for resource allocation was required and clarity about future funding commitments was requested. One respondent commented that it would be useful to know what the potential funding streams were. Another suggested that the scope of funding streams to support the involvement of the NHS in preventing and tackling homelessness has not been clear.

126. The view that there is a need to ensure that Supporting People Programme funds are sufficient to address the housing support needs of homeless households was raised by approximately 40% of those who responded to this question. The planned research to assess the impact of Supporting People funding on different client groups was welcomed. Research by Shelter was reported as making a number of relevant recommendations including: Executive to consider how it could provide an active role in monitoring the extent to which SP money is spent on homelessness within local authority areas; increasing allocations, or an alternative development and innovation fund for new projects created to take into account the new duties towards homeless people; and Executive to provide clarity on how the new SP formula would be implemented locally.

127. There was support for more streamlined funding to reduce the inflexibility of narrow funding streams, potentially through bringing together existing funding streams and giving greater scope for local authorities to draw creatively on other sources of funding.

128. There was a view that more attention needed to be paid to the particular difficulties facing rural areas and the need to ensure that funding allocations reflected these. In particular, dependence on the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation was seen as unhelpful and as penalising deprived households living in rural areas. 'Sparcity funding' and the development of funding formulas that more effective recognise rural deprivation were requested.

129. Specific recommendations made were:

• Implementing a system to pay off rent arrears to prevent evictions by way of a Tenancy Sustainability Grant;
• Specific funding aimed at assisting local authorities to provide temporary accommodation with the effect of freeing up other funding for preventative work;
• Development of a crisis response model as in Glasgow;
• Changes to Housing Benefit rules;
• Funding to bodies other than local authorities, such as development funding not currently administered by local authorities, and grants to private developers;
• Use of social care monies, funding attached to ADATs and Mental Health services, Social Work;
• Better support to children in homeless families through the Additional Support for Learning Act (2004);
• National furniture recycling schemes;
• Coordinating health funding more effectively to ensure a better strategic fit with Homelessness Strategies and Health and Homelessness Action plans; linking Health Improvement Fund allocations directly to the prevention of homelessness;
• Community Scotland's development programme to be more targeted at social rented housing (rather than low cost home ownership);
• Clear links to Changing Children's Services Funding, Working for Families Funding;
• Role of NGOs and experience in developing creative and innovative services; and
• Proving GAE and external challenge funding for a longer term than current practice.

Key points

130. There was a high degree of consensus among responses on the policy areas relevant to the 2012 target. In order of frequency, those most commonly cited were the Supporting People programme, Housing Benefit rules and regulations, Anti-social Behaviour legislation, private sector lettings, and the Right to Buy.

131. Respondents also felt that ensuring improved joint working was a key issue, connections between homelessness, health and social work / care services and drug and alcohol addiction services were seen as particularly significant. Respondents also felt that all parts of the housing sector needed to recognise their responsibilities towards homeless households.

132. Suggestions for specific actions centred on the provision of affordable housing and funding for support services, actions to address the difficulties Local Authorities face in discharging their homelessness duties through the private rented sector, work to address the stigma of homelessness and to promote preventative activity and work to ensure coordination with other areas of legislation, in particular anti-social behaviour and housing benefit.

133. The main barriers identified to diverse housing outcomes for homeless people were:

• Lack of available suitable stock;
• Stigma;
• Issues relating to the private rented sector;
• Housing benefit rules and regulations;
• Restrictions on tenancy types allowed to discharge duty; and
• Support needs.

134. In addition, the short-term nature of funding streams, planning and land use regulations and infrastructure issues were also often identified as barriers.

135. Several respondents were of the view that existing funding streams were stretched to full capacity, though some also believed that they could be used more effectively. It was commonly believed that more effective use of existing funding streams did not alter the need for additional funding which would be required.

« Previous | Contents | Next »