The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER SIX - YOUTH HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION: FAMILY MEDIATION AND SUPPORTED TRANSITIONAL HOUSING SCHEMES

Chapter scope

6.1 This chapter covers two forms of homelessness prevention both primarily (though not exclusively) targeted on young people. 'Young people' are defined here as including both 16-17 year olds (a group legally classed as 'vulnerable' on the grounds of youth) and adults aged 18-25. Between them, these two sub-groups accounted for 25 per cent of households presenting as homeless in 2005/06 (seven per cent and 18 per cent of the total, respectively) ³⁸. Firstly, we examine 'family mediation' intervention. This refers to action on the part of LAs (or their agents) to reconcile concealed households with their host household counterparts - in practice, usually young people and their parents (see also 2.32-2.33). In some cases, the aim of such intervention would be to enable the concealed household to remain in the family home, in other instances it could be to sustain or strengthen support networks with the intention of increasing the sustainability of any new accommodation secured.

6.2 Secondly, we look at transitional supported housing schemes (see also 2.34-2.36). These are projects usually operated by voluntary agencies and which accept referrals of 'vulnerable young people' from local authorities. As well as accommodation, such schemes are designed to help residents overcome social, economic and personal problems, and to help them develop the 'independent living skills' necessary to sustain a mainstream tenancy.

Family mediation

6.3 More than a third (36 per cent) of homeless presentations in Scotland during 2005/06 involved 'family/friend exclusions' (people being asked to leave the homes of friends, parents or other relatives). A considerable proportion of these will have involved young people leaving the family home for the first time. The role for family mediation in preventing homelessness is therefore potentially significant.

6.4 The following section draws on the telephone survey of local authorities as well as on case study evidence in respect of schemes operated by North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire and Stirling. Importantly, in all these authorities family mediation services were delivered as a distinct project, as opposed to being entirely integral within the role of homelessness caseworkers (see below).

Mediation service delivery models

6.5 As noted in Chapter Two, around 20 authorities provided (or commissioned) family mediation services aimed primarily at tackling youth homelessness (see Tables 2.1 and 2.2). In many cases such activity was an integral aspect of homelessness casework. In some LAs (e.g. Edinburgh, Highland, Moray) mediation projects were in an early or pilot phase. Likewise, in most LAs currently operational mediation services had been developed only recently - in six LAs initiated within the previous year, and in another seven functioning for less than three years.

6.6 The three case study LAs cited above exemplify the varied ways that 'project style' family mediation style services can be delivered. In Stirling, the service was provided by the Council within the context of a larger 'youth homelessness' project providing supported temporary accommodation and operated by a voluntary agency under contract. The overall objective of the project was to help vulnerable young homeless people develop the independent living skills necessary to sustain a subsequent mainstream tenancy. Here, family mediation could be an aspect of a young person's support plan. Service recipients were young people who had already been excluded from the family home, assessed as priority homeless by Stirling Council and subsequently referred to the accommodation project. Mediation provision within this context reflects that the primary objective is to improve the young person's prospects of sustaining a subsequent tenancy (though, as reported by the Council, it could in some cases result in the service user returning to the family home).

6.7 Renfrewshire's family mediation provision took the form of a project jointly established by the Council's housing and social work departments. A family mediation officer post had been created in social work. Again, mediation formed an aspect of a more broadly scoped project whose aims included promoting tenancy sustainment for young people unable to return to the parental home, as well as seeking to encourage such returns where possible. As in Stirling, mediation was entirely detached from the homelessness assessment process. It was usually initiated only following the completion of this process.

6.8 North Ayrshire's family mediation setup was different again. First, it should be acknowledged that the Council termed their project 'young persons prevention' rather than 'mediation'. The scheme involved home visits in respect of young people presenting as homeless in cases of 'family/friend exclusion'. Undertaken by housing support staff, the procedure was primarily part of establishing whether an applicant was legally homeless because it was impossible for them to remain in (or return to) their former home. The project was not badged as mediation. Nor were staff trained mediators. In practice, however, visits were reported as often incorporating a mediation element - an attempt to find common ground between excluder and excluded parties. Somewhat in contrast to Stirling and Renfrewshire, the North Ayrshire scheme was squarely aimed at preventing homelessness before its occurrence, and minimising the numbers of young people assessed as priority homeless cases entitled to rehousing. (Note that, alongside its young persons prevention project, North Ayrshire also made occasional use of referrals to SACRO - see below).

6.9 A crucial element of the North Ayrshire scheme was its integration within the homelessness assessment process. Telephone survey findings suggest that approaches similar in this respect were operated in Inverclyde, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian. Here, there was no formal mediation project, but homelessness caseworkers were encouraged to incorporate 'mediation-style' discussions into their handling of applications from young people.

6.10 A final example (gleaned from the national survey rather than the case study work) illustrates yet another approach to mediation service provision. Moray and Highland Councils reported plans to establish a joint project. Instead of commissioning an external agency to operate the service, the authorities had jointly funded a number of staff members to train as mediators. Staff had been chosen from a range of agencies, both in an attempt to vary the skills of mediators, but also to avoid any conflict of interest that may arise in caseloads. The service was being developed on the back of a recognition that staff were informally undertaking mediation-style activities - untrained and unregulated. The two councils planned to appoint SACRO to assist in monitoring the scheme and to provide ongoing support to staff members.

Target group

6.11 Across the country, the target group for family mediation activities was usually young people aged 16-25, threatened with exclusion from the home of family, other relatives or friends. In practice, however, service users tended to be 16-17 year olds who (if actually homeless) would normally be treated as 'in priority need' on the grounds of youth. In North Ayrshire, targeting was widened to encompass 20-25 year olds, following initial success in preventing homelessness among 16-19 year olds (where success was defined as enabling the young person to continue living in (or return to) the family home').

Mediation processes

6.12 Detailed information on 'mediation' processes was collected from two case study LAs - Renfrewshire and North Ayrshire. In Renfrewshire, referrals to the service came from a number of sources. These included the Social Work department, voluntary agencies and local housing offices, as well as through homelessness casework staff. In some instances referrals involved young people already rehoused by the Council and identified as being at risk of failing to sustain their tenancy, in part due to a lack of family support. Being detached from the homelessness assessment process (see above) the service was offered on a strictly voluntary basis and was seen as possible only where both parties (young person and parent(s)) were willing to participate. In the spirit of 'early intervention', leaflets publicising the service were also sent to young people registered on the Council's housing waiting list.

6.13 In North Ayrshire, referrals to the service came entirely from area housing offices which were the first port of call for people presenting as homeless. Area offices were expected to refer all young single applicants aged under 26 and facing 'family/friend exclusion'. Applicants were then subject to an initial interview to establish their personal situation and the factors making them liable to homelessness. For households already literally homeless (i.e. roofless), the Council aimed to complete such interviews on the same day as the referral. A risk assessment was routinely undertaken as the basis for a judgement on whether a home visit could endanger either the applicant or the staff member.

6.14 A home visit was then arranged to enable the staff member to speak with both parties. Again, in cases of literal homelessness, the Council aimed to undertake this visit on the same day as the referral. Otherwise, the young person was asked whether they could return home temporarily or stay with a friend or other relative until a home visit could be undertaken. If none of these options was feasible the Council was legally obliged to offer temporary accommodation.

6.15 Officers visited the applicant's home address repeatedly until succeeding in making direct contact with both parties. The first objective of these visits was to corroborate the applicant's account of events leading to their having to leave the home. Reportedly, parents are sometimes entirely unaware that their son or daughter has made a homelessness application. In practice 'unacceptable behaviour' was reportedly a more common cause of disputes than drug or alcohol abuse. However, issues such as drug abuse may come to light only through discussion with parents and this may help the officer determine appropriate onward referral (e.g. for addiction treatment).

6.16 Sometimes visits were reported as confirming an officer's belief that parent and son/daughter had colluded to fabricate a story about an 'irreconcilable dispute'. Through their interviews officers had to decide whether an applicant's return to the property could lead to any risk of violence or abuse (whether or not this had been alleged).

6.17 Whether it took place at the council's offices or in the applicant's own home, another reportedly common element of the discussion in these cases involved the staff member explaining the likely consequences of the applicant becoming homeless (i.e. where a return to the family home could not be achieved). One service user interviewee reported that the alarming account of life in institutional accommodation conveyed in this discussion had been persuasive in motivating her wish to remain in the family home (see para 9.36). (The accommodation being referred to here was the Council's supported transitional housing scheme).

6.18 As a rule, interview visits were reported as lasting 30-60 minutes.

6.19 As well as attempting to find common ground between excluder and excluded, Council staff saw home visits as useful in providing comfort to parents by offering to refer the young person for specialist help (e.g. welfare benefits advice or drug treatment). In some cases, it could be decided that reconciliation might be facilitated by a 'cooling off period'. Occasionally in such circumstances, 'respite' temporary accommodation was offered.

Take-up rates

6.20 Recent English research showed that some LAs had found it difficult to get young people to engage with family mediation ³⁹. As part of the national survey of Scottish LAs, we collected information on the take-up rate of projects as a measure of 'success' (see Table 2.2 - Chapter 2). Notably, of the 11 schemes operated by external agencies, the majority (9) were assessed as having a poor or very low take-up rate. Part of issue here may well be the limited capacity of some agencies to take on referrals. In North Ayrshire, for example, it was reported that SACRO appointments usually involved a considerable lead-in time, thereby greatly increasing the risk that homelessness would already have occurred by the time the interview was held. This was seen as substantially reducing the chances of enabling the young person to return to the family home.

6.21 It was not possible to determine the 'take-up rate' for five of the in-house schemes listed in Table 2.2, either because they had been recently developed or because no records of take-up were maintained. For the remaining four, take-up was judged to be fairly high. With such small numbers, it would be unwise to draw any firm conclusions about the relative effectiveness of in-house and external service provision. However, it does raise the question of what factors influence such apparently significant variations in take-up. A primary concern among telephone survey respondents was the way mediation services are presented. Lack of publicity often meant that staff were unaware that such a service was available.

6.22 Where family mediation projects were integral to the homelessness assessment process, it was generally the role of the homelessness caseworker to introduce the service to the young person concerned. As might be expected, therefore, take up rates were reported as heavily reliant on how this initial introduction was effected.

6.23 An important aspect of this is whether the service is presented as entirely voluntary from the client perspective. Some authorities reported that young people invited to participate in mediation on a voluntary basis commonly rejected such offers, seeing the service as simply aimed at preventing them from exercising their 'right' to a council tenancy. However, the Renfrewshire figures set out in Table 6.1 show that even in a context where there is a strong commitment to purely voluntary engagement it is possible to achieve a respectable takeup rate - almost half of the 47 people referred to the Renfrewshire service in 2005-2006 (49 per cent) were recorded as having engaged with it.

6.24 Another commonly expressed issue related to the point at which referrals are made to family mediation. In many cases referrals were described as simply taking place too late: "by this stage it is often at crisis point and relationships are broken down too far [for mediation to have an impact]." Another respondent argued that mediation introduced a young person after they had gone through the homelessness assessment and been placed in temporary accommodation was too late to be effective.

Service effectiveness and the assessment of 'success'

6.25 The national survey found that LAs offering an informal 'mediation style' service through existing staff typically recorded neither activity, nor the outcome of cases. However, all LAs operating family mediation services as 'formal projects' were formally monitoring service activity. Although all stated that this included success measures, it was not always clear how a 'successful' outcome was defined and whether this included any attention to sustainability.

Table 6.1 - Renfrewshire Council family mediation referrals, June 2005-Dec 2006: breakdown of intervention outcomes

Source: Renfrewshire Council

6.26 A complicating factor here is that - as will have become clear from the earlier commentary - not all mediation services have identical objectives. Some (e.g. Renfrewshire, Stirling) focused primarily on reconciling homeless young people with other family members. If this resulted in enabling the family to 're-unite', all well and good. Otherwise, it was seen as helping to improve the young person's chances of subsequent tenancy sustainment. Nevertheless, Renfrewshire's internal monitoring statistics suggested that young homeless people 'returning home' following mediation support accounted for a fifth of cases of young people offered family mediation in 2005-2006 (see Table 6.1). Importantly, of the nine cases where mediation facilitated a 'return home', all but one of these arrangements were recorded as having been sustained for at least six months. In another 30 per cent of mediation referral cases, the outcome was a planned move but mediation support ensured that the young person remained in contact with their family. Because this was seen as improving the young person's chances of sustaining their subsequent tenancy, such outcomes were also judged 'successful' in terms of homelessness prevention.

6.27 Other LAs (e.g. North Ayrshire) focused mainly on preventing 'primary homelessness' (i.e. exclusion from the family home). If lasting reconciliation between family members was achieved through the intervention, this was also welcome. Initially, the service was recording a '90 per cent success rate' - that is, 90 per cent of applicants referred were assisted to return to/remain in their former home. More recently, the success rate has fallen to 58 per cent (see Table 6.2). This reflects the expansion of the project's scope to encompass 20-25 year olds whose continued presence in the family home may be more problematic.

Table 6.2 - North Ayrshire young persons prevention project referrals Jan-Sep 2006 - breakdown by intervention outcome

Source: North Ayrshire Council

6.28 In the first three quarters of 2006 inward referrals totalled 165. In 96 of these cases, 'homelessness was prevented' - see Table 6.2. Where the intervention failed to enable the young person to return to/remain at home, temporary accommodation was provided in most cases. For some of those concerned (e.g. those aged under 18 and others in priority need), the Council would also have been obliged to secure a permanent tenancy ⁴⁰. In practice, as an interim step en route to permanent rehousing, most such individuals would be referred to the Quarriers transitional supported housing scheme (see second half of this chapter).

6.29 Of the 96 cases where young people returned to the homes of parents, friends or relatives, half involved individuals aged under 18 - meaning that, had they become homeless, they would have been in priority need.

6.30 Scaled up to annual estimates, these monitoring figures suggest that the prevention project handled about 220 referrals per year, with around 128 of these resulting in 'homelessness prevention' (at least in the short term).

6.31 In none of the case study LAs discussed here, however, were figures available to illustrate the sustainability of outcomes recorded as initially 'successful'.

6.32 The 'outcome statistics' set out above were cited by North Ayrshire Council in support of the council's view that this is its 'most successful' homelessness prevention service. Contributory factors to this success, in the council's view, are:

• Designation of highly motivated staff with appropriate skills (e.g. communication) and knowledge (homelessness legislation)
• Effective communication to the service user of the likely implications of becoming homeless (i.e. making clear the likely duration of temporary accommodation placement and damping down expectations as to the tenancy offer likely to be received)
• Measuring and monitoring staff performance at the level of individual staff members.

6.33 The council's judgement of 'success' needs to be weighed against the views of the five service users interviewed by the research team (see Chapter 9). Interviewees tended to see the council's intervention here as largely negative in pressing them to return to the family home rather than offering them the secure tenancy they had expected to access via their homelessness application (see paras 9.35, 9.43, 9.57). Such an expectation may well have stemmed from beliefs within the family that council housing would be fairly freely available to this generation as, perhaps, it was to the last. From the applicant viewpoint, therefore, the 'young persons prevention' process was essentially a case of the council policing access to social housing rather than providing any kind of 'service' to the applicant. It is relevant here to note that the staff concerned did not see their role as primarily about mediation and that they had not been specifically trained to provide such help.

6.34 Two of the service user interviewees who had returned to the family home perceived themselves as at continuing risk of homelessness because of serious overcrowding and/or an expectation of being 'chucked out' of the family home once more. In two other cases, however, intra-family relationships were reported as having improved since council intervention. Whilst both of these latter interviewees continued to favour a move to an independent tenancy, this could perhaps be seen as more of an aspiration than an immediate necessity. Even so, there were indications that a number of the five cases could have benefited from ongoing mediation and/or other support in an effort to promote and/or underpin domestic harmony. Reportedly, no such help was being provided.

Service costs

6.35 The costs of family mediation interventions are difficult to identify. This is inherently the case where mediation is provided by homelessness casework staff rather than via a formal project. Even the 'project' setting can be problematic if (as in Stirling) mediation is integrated within a broader package of services for young people.

6.36 The following figures relate to North Ayrshire's young persons prevention project. As noted above, the service is provided by staff primarily responsible for tenancy support. In total, it was estimated by the Council that prevention visits absorbed around 1.0 FTE in staff time input. Assuming gross salary costs of £30K (inclusive of employer NI and pension contributions) and allowing for overheads at 40 per cent of salary, this might incur an annual gross cost of around £42K. This works out at £191 per case (£42K/220 cases) or £328 per case of homelessness prevented (£42K/128 cases). It should be borne in mind that much of the staff time involved could be classed as part of the assessment process rather than as prevention work per se (because - unlike some other LAs - 'mediation' provision was integral to homelessness assessment).

Future plans

6.37 At the time of the national survey at least five more family mediation projects were at the planning stage:

• Aberdeen City - it was hoped that a mediation element would be included within the information and advice service.
• Clackmannanshire - although no specific family mediation project was planned, the new Homelessness and Visiting Officer was to undertake informal mediation if appropriate.
• Dundee - working with NCH to establish a new family mediation project.
• Falkirk - new mediation project included in the Council's updated Homelessness Strategy.
• North Lanarkshire - in the process of training staff to be mediators through SACRO. 25 staff now accredited. Having completed this programme the Council planned to restructure and create a new 'Prevention and Advice Officer' post.

Transitional supported housing schemes

Background

6.38 In 2005/06, local authorities logged nearly 4,000 homelessness presentations from young people aged under 18 (seven per cent of all presentations). Under the homelessness legislation, young persons aged 16-17 are considered as automatically in priority need and, consequently, a local authority rehousing responsibility unless also deemed to be intentionally homeless ⁴¹. However, many of those concerned are seen as poorly equipped to manage and sustain their own tenancy in mainstream social housing. Also relevant here is the fact that single people aged under 18 accounted for less than two per cent of all tenancies let by RSLs in 2005/06 ( SCORE data).

6.39 Recognising that many 16-17 year olds are unready for a secure tenancy, around half of LAs have established 'supported transitional housing' schemes for young people (see Table 2.1). Such projects are usually operated under contract by voluntary agencies. Schemes of this kind were run in three of our case study LAs:

• East Dunbartonshire - Canal Project operated by NCH
• North Ayrshire - North Ayrshire Supported Accommodation ( NASA) operated by Quarriers
• Stirling - Bridge Project operated by Loretto.

6.40 All three projects were established in 2002/03 as integral elements of the new homelessness prevention regime. Also of crucial importance here was the establishment of the Supporting People funding stream from which the projects have been financed. The following section details the services provided in these projects.

Project objectives

6.41 The prime objectives for the three projects were to provide young homeless people with the skills needed for independent living, and to support their transition into permanent tenancies. The projects involved both residential accommodation and outreach support services. Young persons' crisis accommodation was another element to the services (though in North Ayrshire it was reported that the facility was often fully occupied and therefore unable to accept such referrals).

6.42 Bridge Project accommodation consisted of 10 flats (eight with kitchens, two bedsits). The main NASA premises contained 19 self-contained bedsits and four flats, as well as a 5-bed satellite facility in another town. The Canal Project was smaller, involving shared accommodation for six young people and independent tenancies for two.

Target groups and referral sources

6.43 All three projects were targeted on young single people. In the main this involved homeless applicants aged 16-17 who would, in any event, be automatically in priority need (see para 6.38). However, all three schemes examined here also accommodated slightly older people (up to age 21 in the East Dunbartonshire's Canal Project and up to age 25 in the North Ayrshire and Renfrewshire projects) ⁴². Whilst all Bridge Project referrals came via LA homelessness staff, some of NASA's intake came via North Ayrshire Council's Social Work department in their role as overseeing discharges from local authority care. The Canal Project's target group was young vulnerable adults aged 16-21 and assessed as priority homeless households. It should, however, be noted that the Project was not considered suitable for people with 'overly high' support needs.

6.44 North Ayrshire's NASA project handled an annual throughput of around 91 residential accommodation inward referrals - a much larger number than at the other two projects. About a quarter of NASA admissions involved 'returnees' with a little less than half of this group having been previously evicted from the project (see below).

6.45 Not all of those referred for residential accommodation actually move in. As shown in Table 6.4, this was true for less than half of those referred to the Bridge Project in 2005/06. Similarly, figures for the Canal Project show that those accepted by NCH amounted to around 58 per cent of total 2003-06 referrals.

Table 6.4 - Bridge Project inward residential referrals, 2005/06 by referral outcome

Source: Loretto

6.46 Little is known about the circumstances surrounding cases where individuals 'return home' rather than move into a project - it is possible that these cases represent instances of homelessness actively prevented (e.g. via advice and/or mediation). This is how the statistics are interpreted by Stirling Council.

6.47 It is also notable that a quarter of Bridge Project 2005/06 referrals were withdrawn having been accepted onto the Project's waiting list or failed to attend interview (see Table 6.4). Some of these latter cases may have involved young people disappointed to discover that their homelessness application was not a fast track to a secure tenancy. However, Stirling Council point out that where a referral to the residential project results in support being provided purely on an outreach basis this is likely to be a successful outcome..

Service processes and content

6.48 Young people referred to the projects were initially interviewed and assigned a support worker. Working closely with the client, support workers drew on a menu of support options to create a customised support plan, to be signed off by the client. The plan outlined the various targets that the young person wished to achieve with project support. In both projects it was a condition of residence that the young person was willing to work with their designated staff member and to accept the support provided.

6.49 Reflecting the focus on acquiring the skills necessary to manage a tenancy, support tended to cover issues such as:

• Budgeting
• Personal and domestic hygiene
• Cookery skills and shopping
• Neighbourhood skills.

6.50 As well as helping young people to address their problems directly, project staff also facilitated client referrals to specialist services where necessary (e.g. to address drug or alcohol dependency).

6.51 The support worker role also included helping young people enrol in training and/or obtaining employment. At NASA, weekly careers adviser outreach visits were an important strand to this. Linked to this, there was reported to be an emphasis on helping to boost residents' self-confidence - e.g. entering residents for the Duke of Edinburgh's award scheme. As their D of E project, a group had recently made a film about the stigma surrounding homelessness. In a similar vein, three Canal Project residents had travelled on 2006 Raleigh International trips to Gambia, Costa Rica and Namibia.

6.52 NASA project residents were encouraged to 'broaden horizons' by trying out and participating in sporting and other physical activities. These included 5-a-side football, yoga, skiing, indoor climbing, swimming, cycling and walking. For some, activities of this kind had never been tried before.

6.53 The projects also worked to help young people engage with their community. At NASA this included fortnightly visits by the local community police officer which were presented as a 'debating group'. Issues covered included alcohol and drug awareness, violence in the community, anti-social behaviour and self-esteem.

6.54 Support workers monitored the progress of the residents under their supervision and (in respect of the Bridge Project) made monthly progress reports to the council on each resident. NASA support programmes involved a minimum of three months. In practice (as at the Canal Project), young people 'staying the course' usually remained resident in NASA accommodation for 6-9 months (with stays occasionally extending to two years). A judgement that a resident was 'house ready' triggered the re-instatement of their suspended council housing application.

6.55 As well as supported interim housing both the Bridge Project and NASA provided floating support for young people in the community. In part this was directed at formerly homeless people who had been through the residential programmes described above. The approach employed here was similar to that for core accommodation residents in that the help provided to service users was organised to fit with a personalised support plan.

6.56 Over and above its core residential and outreach support services, the Bridge Project also included an information and advice facility - a 'drop-in' service providing housing-related information for young people (e.g. in relation to benefits). Allied to this, the Project was involved in educational work. This was exemplified by the production and screening of a DVD involving young people from the local area who were homeless (or who had experienced homelessness). The DVD, screened in local secondary schools, aimed to convey the message that homelessness can affect a wide range of people and to signpost sources of advice and practical help in avoiding this.

Service effectiveness and the assessment of 'success'

6.57 Whilst the projects were primarily intended as transitional accommodation for priority homeless households transiting to social housing, only a minority of those exiting core accommodation at the three projects took up social rented tenancies (see Table 6.5). Some or all of those who moved to other temporary accommodation may subsequently have obtained a council tenancy. At the most, however, those moving into tenancies accounted for only half those exiting NASA and for only 44 per cent of those moving on from the Bridge Project (see Table 6.5). It is, however, worth noting that some residents returned to their former family home (in some cases aided by mediation support) and these could be counted as examples of direct homelessness prevention.

6.58 Over a fifth of people exiting NASA, and over a quarter of those leaving the Bridge did so through eviction or notice to quit (see Table 6.5). Most of those evicted from NASA had committed a 'severe breach of health and safety policy' or had been abusive or threatening. Other offences included theft and breach of alcohol or drug policy. There was police involvement in seven of the 10 evictions logged during the time period covered here. These figures probably serve mainly to emphasize the challenging nature of the client group concerned, with a significant proportion of inward referrals having little or no previous experience of settled family life - an observation particularly relevant to the sizeable proportion of cases involving care leavers.

Table 6.5 - Individuals leaving NASA, Bridge Project and Canal Project residential accommodation, 2003-2006: main reason for leaving

*includes 'no longer suitable for receiving the service' and 'found alternative accommodation'.
*individuals who 'left the service' not necessarily resulting from eviction. Note: time periods: NASA - Sept 2005-Mar 2006; Bridge Project - 2005/06; Canal Project - Apr 2003-Aug 2006. Sources: Quarriers, Loretto, NCH

6.59 It is useful to note that the three service user interviewees with experience of transitional supported accommodation projects all reported these to have provided them with appropriate help (see para 9.30-9.31).

6.60 Service user testimony aside, however, it is difficult assess the overall success of case study transitional supported housing projects. Whilst the projects' central aim was reported as being to enable young people to sustain subsequent tenancies there did not appear to be any routine procedure for collecting and reporting such information on the part of the councils concerned. The Canal Project's success was also asserted as being demonstrated by reductions in rates of drug and alcohol abuse as well as by the numbers of young people helped into employment (though precise figures were not provided). Notwithstanding the apparent absence of hard statistical evidence, all three relevant case study LAs considered Project services to be an extremely valuable element of their homelessness strategies.

6.61 North Ayrshire Council and partner agencies had been developing a tool for systematically measuring individuals' support needs and outcomes. This was relevant for all groups receiving support of the kinds described above. The device catalogues a household's problems and calibrates progress in resolving these. The tool comes in the form of a matrix which is treated as a support plan signed off by the client as well as the support worker. The matrix uses the following headings:

• Addictions
• Anti-social behaviour
• Budgeting
• Debt management
• Form-filling
• Independent Living Skills
• Rent/Council Tax arrears
• Resettlement
• Self-esteem and confidence
• Social interaction and relationships
• Social work support needs
• Training/employment

6.62 At the outset (e.g. upon initial referral), the support agency staff member assesses the individual/household under each of these headings and scores them on a 0-4 scale where 0='no risk' and 4='crisis'. For each aspect where a score of 1 or more is attributed, an estimated timescale is recorded to indicate the duration of support judged likely to be required to address the issue. As well as acting as a support plan, the matrix is seen as useful in measuring the impact of support in a systematic and structured way. Hence, a client's cumulative 'score' can be periodically assessed.

6.63 Whilst the North Ayrshire support matrix cannot straightforwardly substitute for statistical data demonstrating service effectiveness, it is relevant to the broader issue of systematic measurement of service impact and, hence, scheme success in preventing homelessness.

Service procurement, costs and funding

6.64 All three councils saw their voluntary agency partners as providing added value through bringing to bear the organisations' specialist expertise. Project operation was guided by documented contracts (or 'service level agreements) listing project functions. However, rather than specifying service standards, performance indicators or targets, the North Ayrshire/ NASASLA specified the scale of service simply in terms of inputs (number of hours of housing support to be funded by the Council through Supporting People).

6.65 The North Ayrshire and Stirling projects were operated within the context of 3-year contracts. Following a tendering exercise in 2005, the Bridge Project provider had changed from Quarriers to Loretto, though existing staff had transferred to their new employer under TUPE.

6.66 Total cost figures were unavailable for NASA and for the Canal Project. Housing support costs for the Bridge Project residential accommodation amounted to £16,750 per year per bedspace. This reflects the intensive nature of the support such projects typically provide (e.g. 24-hour staffing).

6.67 It should be noted that the unit cost figure cited above is net of 'landlord costs' which are re-charged to tenants via rent. Whilst such rents are eligible to be met by Housing Benefit, their relatively high level (e.g. £147 per week for the Canal Project) can present a barrier to young people entering employment (because the withdrawal of benefit to match earned income damages work incentives). Stirling Council has attempted to alleviate this problem by taking on two private tenancies to enable young people enrolled within the Project to move into cheaper accommodation (on a shared basis).

6.68 The proposed 'mainstreaming' of Supporting People funding could present a challenge for projects of this kind since this may situate such schemes in more direct competition for funds with other council services. This could place these projects under greater pressure to demonstrate their cost-effectiveness than has been previously the case. Given what appear to be quite high unit costs, the Projects may need to develop more transparent measures of their 'success' in order to justify their continued receipt of what may often involve a substantial proportion of their authority's total SP budget.

Chapter summary

6.69 Within their strategies to prevent youth homelessness, most authorities provide some form of family mediation intervention. As a rule, efforts are targeted mainly on 16-17 year olds who would, if actually homeless, be normally classed as priority need cases to be permanently rehoused.

6.70 Mediation is provided in a variety of ways. In some authorities it is integrated within homelessness assessment procedures (usually as an aspect of caseworker responsibilities). In others it is provided within the context of an externalised youth homelessness project where mediation is an element alongside other functions. Where it is integrated within the statutory assessment process, there may be an overlap between mediation aimed primarily at family reconciliation and casework focusing mainly on testing an applicant's claim to be legally homeless. This can take place through a home visit where a young person claiming homelessness and their parents may be jointly interviewed.

6.71 In some LAs there is a strong emphasis on intervening via a home visit before homelessness actually occurs. Nevertheless, mediation involving young people already assessed as priority homeless and living in temporary accommodation can result in their returning to the parental home.

6.72 A number of LAs report their mediation efforts being compromised through a low rate of engagement. However, whilst this is in some instances attributed to the voluntary nature of the process, case study evidence suggests that this need not be so. Almost half of referrals to Renfrewshire Council's mediation service were recorded as engaging with it. Two case study LAs reported mediation 'success rates' (i.e. proportion of cases resulting in a return to the family home) as 27 per cent and 58 per cent. However, the durability of these outcomes was not recorded.

6.73 The cost of North Ayrshire Council's 'young persons prevention project' is estimated as £328 per case of homelessness prevented.

6.74 At least ten LAs have established 'supported transitional housing' schemes for young people. These are usually run by external agencies (e.g. Quarriers, Loretto, NCH) and have a primary stated purpose of equipping young people to successfully manage and sustain mainstream tenancies. To this end, service users were helped with issues such as budgeting, domestic and personal hygiene, and shopping and cooking skills. Young people were also helped in relation to training and employment, confidence building and community engagement.

6.75 In practice, case study evidence suggests that only around half of those referred to supported transitional housing projects subsequently move on to mainstream council tenancies. Some return to the parental home whilst a significant proportion of others are evicted for anti-social behaviour. Whilst projects' main stated aim is to maximise subsequent tenancy sustainment, this was not formally monitored in the two relevant case study LAs.

6.76 Transitional housing projects of this kind cater for many young people with extensive support needs which demand fairly intensive provision from highly trained staff. This is reflected in the £16,750 per bedspace per year housing support cost cited by one of our case study schemes.

« Previous | Contents | Next »