Annual Rough Sleeping Summary Report for
London 2003 (HOM 22(i))
BROADWAY
Broadway's vision is that every single person
finds and keeps a home.
Our holistic approach to homelessness aims to
enable people to move from a life on the streets to having the
living skills and confidence to sustain a home of their own. We
provide services to over 2,000 people every year who are at risk
of, or are experiencing homelessness. Our pan-London services
extend from street outreach, accommodation, health care and welfare
advice to resettlement and ongoing tenancy support. We also seek
to influence policy and practice by contributing to a greater
understanding of homelessness and social exclusion. By providing
continual support, we help people to make the journey from street
to home.
Broadway's mission is to support, guide and
influence whatever it takes, however long it takes.
We provide a range of services from street to
home for vulnerable individuals when they need it. We work with
and encourage other agencies that support homeless people to push
forward the barriers of good practice.
By developing trust and demonstrating respect,
we show individuals the choices open to them and the potential
within them. We look for new and better ways to create awareness
among our staff, funders, the media, government and the general
public about the needs of single homeless people.
By recognising people's individuality and addressing
their personal, mental, physical and social needs, we encourage
individuals to positively change their lives. By advocating change
in public and official attitudes, we influence the policy and
practice of agencies, institutions and government towards single
homeless people.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Policy development relating to rough sleeping
The Homelessness and Housing Support Directorate
was formed towards the end of 2003 with the merger of the Homelessness
Directorate and the Housing Care and Support Division.
The Directorate's key priorities include:
— Sustaining successes in reducing
the most acute homelessness problems of rough sleeping and the
use of B&B hotels for families with children.
— To ensure that the new Supporting
People programme is placed on a sustainable footing and that good
value for money is achieved in the delivery of housing-related
support at the local level, to help vulnerable people sustain
independent living.
The Government met its target that, by March
2004, no homeless family with children should be placed in a bed
and breakfast hotel other than in an emergency, and even then
for no more than six weeks.
The Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation)
(England) Order 2003 came into force on 1 April, to reinforce
and sustain the B&B target.
Outreach teams have also seen their remit widened
over the past year to tackle all elements of street life rather
than just rough sleeping. Teams now work with street drinkers,
people who are begging and street workers as well as rough sleepers.
Local authorities have continued to take a strategic
approach to homelessness in their borough over the past year as
a result of requirements by Supporting People and the Homelessness
Act 2002. This has resulted in an increasingly proactive rather
than reactive approach being taken to homelessness.
Combined with this has been the emergence of
a regional and sub-regional approach for housing. In 2003 London
saw the establishment of the London Housing Board and its development
of the first London Housing Strategy. The Board and Strategy are
designed to advise central government on the allocation of funding
from the Single Regional Pot for housing investment. As a response
to these developments local authorities have formed themselves
into sub-regional groups and developed sub-regional housing strategies.
Supporting People in 2004 celebrated its first
birthday. However, there continues to remain uncertainty over
levels of funding for local authorities' Supporting People budgets.
The Treasury has placed a requirement on local authorities to
find efficiency savings within their SP budgets.
Health
Over the past year, the focus continues to remain
on reducing health inequalities and meeting targets around life
expectancy and improving the nation's health. The Government
has consulted over the contents of a white paper looking at the
health of the nation.
Drugs and Alcohol
The Government has also published its first
ever Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy, in which street drinkers
are identified as an at-risk group. Tackling the misuse of drugs
and reducing drug related crime has continued to remain a focus
for central government.
Anti-social Behaviour
In the past year, central government has had
an increased focus on reducing anti-social behaviour.
KEY FACTS:
SLEEPING IN
2003
3,186 people were contacted on the streets by
London outreach teams in 2003 (3,324 in 2002).
12% (378) of these 3,186 had only a single street
contact in 2003 (17% in 2002).
2,808 people were contacted on the streets by
London outreach teams in 2003 and interacted with services more
than just this once (2,761 in 2002).
Of these 2,808:
— 50% (1,415) were new clients (52%
in 2002)
— 88% (2,467) were male (89% in 2002)
— 10% (284) were 25 years old or younger
(13% in 2002)
— 18% (527) were aged 50 or over (same
as 2002)
— 82% (2,299) were white (81% in 2002)
— 11% (311) were black (12% in 2002)
— 29% (814) had a recorded alcohol
support need (25% in 2002)
— 34% (945) had a recorded drugs support
need (32% in 2002)
— 22% (607) had a recorded mental health
support need (same % in 2002)
— 56% (1,581) were contacted in the
borough of Westminster (51% in 2002).
Moves off the street
64% (1809) of the 2,808 were assisted in moving
on from the streets by outreach teams (69% in 2002).
Of these 1,809:
— 79% (1,436) were moved into a hostel
(80% in 2002)
— 3% (48) were moved into permanent/private
rented accommodation (4% in 2002)
— 7% (130) returned to their home area,
family, or moved to an area outside London (4% in 2002).
— 11% (194) had a rough sleeping history
of five years or more
— 60% (1,078) had a rough sleeping
history of a year or less
— 62% (1,127) had not been assisted
to move away from the streets before 2003
— 3% (61) had been assisted to move
away from the streets more than 10 times before 2003.
Arrivals
54% (1,521) of the 2,808 arrived at a hostel/rolling
shelter/second stage accommodation in 2003 (48% in 2002)
These 1,521 people had 2,293 arrivals (1,330
people had 1,907 arrivals in 2002).
Of these 1,521:
— 90% (1,367) were referred by an outreach
team (85% in 2002)
— 6% (90) were self-referrals (8% in
2002)
— 13% (352) of the 2,808 were contacted
on the streets in 2003 whilst having a bed in a hostel/rolling
shelter/second stage accommodation which they accessed in the
year (11% in 2002).
Departures
41% (1,140) of the 2,808 left a hostel/rolling
shelter/second stage accommodation in 2003 (35% in 2002). These
1,140 people had 1,663 departures (974 people had 1,361 departures
in 2002).
Of these 1,140:
— 46% (521) departed from a rolling
shelter (15% in 2002)
— 72% (824) departed from hostel/second
stage accommodation (90% in 2002)
— 47% (246) of the 521 departed from
a roller shelter after less than three weeks (same as in 2002)
— 29% (237) of the 824 departed from
a hostel/second stage accommodation after less than three weeks
(33% in 2002)
— 27% (226) of the 824 departed from
a hostel/second stage accommodation after 20 weeks or more (24%
in 2002)
— 31% (349) abandoned a hostel/rolling
shelter/second stage accommodation (29% in 2002)
— 22% (252) were evicted (32% in 2002)
— 50% (565) left due to a planned move
to another service/form of accommodation (34% in 2002)
— 42% (478) left to move to another
hostel or form of temporary accommodation (23% in 2002)
— 5% (58) left to move into permanent/private
rented accommodation (8% in 2002).
2% (55) of the 2,808 had a permanent RSI tenancy
via the Clearing House when they were contacted on the streets
(same % in 2002).
Arrivals
2% (49) of the 2,808 accessed housing through
the Clearing House in 2003 (4% in 2002).
Of these 49:
— 65% (32) were in a hostel directly
before moving into permanent housing (79% in 2002)
— 20% (10) were on the streets directly
before moving into permanent housing (13% in 2002).
Departures
1% (4) of the 2,808 left permanent RSI accommodation
in 2003 (they could have been contacted on the streets in 2003
before or after they left this accommodation) compared to 1% in
2002.
Of these 40:
— 33% (13) departed after less than
one year (same % in 2002)
— 8% (three) departed after three years
or more (16% in 2002)
— 50% (20) abandoned the property (55%
in 2002)
— 43% (17) were evicted (23% in 2002)
— 8% (3) moved out or were transferred
(18% in 2002).
Of the 2,808 people contacted on the streets
and worked with in 2003, at the end of 2003:
— 31% (873) were recorded as being
in a hostel/rolling shelter/second stage/temporary accommodation
(39% in 2002)
— 2% (46) were recorded as being in
permanent/private rented accommodation (3% in 2002)
— 3% (85) went back to family or an
area outside London (4% in 2002)
— 53% (1,481) were last known to be
on the streets according to CHAIN recording, but as regular street
counts indicate numbers at around 267, many of these may have
subsequently found their own route away from rough sleeping or
have linked with other services not monitored by CHAIN—see
flow chart section below and conclusion (43% in 2002)
— 67% (938) of the 1,393 known clients
in 2003 were also contacted by London outreach teams on 2002.
Compared to the support needs recorded for all
clients contacted in 2002 (focus group), the support needs recorded
at the end of 2003 for the 938 who were contacted in both 2003
and 2002 were:
— 33% (311) had a recorded alcohol
support need (25% for all of focus group 2002)
— 44% (410) had a recorded drugs support
need (32% for all of focus group 2002)
— 22% (211) had a recorded mental health
support need (same % for all of focus group 2002).
Of the 1,185 that were last known to be on the
streets in 2002:
— 495 (42%) have not been contacted
again
— 51 (4%) have had a single street
contact in 2003
— 536 (45%) have had more than a single
street contact in 2003
— 360 (30%) have had a street contact
in 2003 and were still last known to be on the streets
— 104 (9%) were contacted in 2003 and
were last known to be in a hostel/rolling shelter/second stage/temporary
accommodation
— Seven (1%) were contacted in
2003 and were last known to be in permanent/private rented accommodation
— 14 (1%) were contacted in 2003 and
were last known to have returned to their family or an area outside
London.
CONCLUSION
— 3,186 people were contacted on the
streets by London outreach teams in 2003
— 12% (378) of these 3,186 had only
a single street contact in 2003
— The report has focused on the remaining
2,808 that were contacted on the streets in London in 2003 and
interacted with service providers more than just this once
— 31% (873) were in a hostel, rolling
shelter or temporary accommodation (39% in 2002)
— 2% (46) were in permanent accommodation
(3% in 2002)
— 3% (85) went back to family or an
area outside London (4% in 2002)
— 53% (1,481) of the people contacted
more than once in 2003 were last recorded on CHAIN as sleeping
rough in 2003 (43% in 2002). Given the regular street count information
(see below) it is clear that some of these people are likely to
have found their own route off the streets or to have contacted
other services.
36% (999) of the 2,808 people worked with on
the streets in 2003 were not moved off the streets by outreach
teams in 2003 (31% in 2002). However, some of these people are
likely to have found their own route off the streets. This is
supported by street count figures which indicate that there are
less than 300 people sleeping on the streets in London on a given
night (street count figure for June 2003: 267[14]);
and also by the fact that 42% of those last known to be on the
streets in 2002, were not contacted again in 2003. Others of the
299 may be linked to other services that are not monitored by
CHAIN.
Although many rough sleepers are successfully
assisted to make a sustained move from the streets, or find their
own route away, for some it remains a difficult process. People
are continuing to arrive on the streets of London, and some return
to the streets despite being previously linked to services. This
is the continued challenge for those working with this group:
— There is a continued flow of new
rough sleepers[15]being
worked with on the streets of London. Half of those contacted
on the streets by outreach teams in London each year have never
been previously worked with by these teams (1,415/50% in 2003;
1,763/52% in 2002).
— Is it possible to assist more of
these rough sleepers to move off the streets more quickly? 14%
(155) of the 1,127 clients who were assisted to move away from
the streets in 2003 for the first time had a history of rough
sleeping of over a year.
— Can the increase in the number of
planned moves from hostels, rolling shelters and second stage
accommodation be further maximised? (50% in 2003; 34% in 2002).
— Is it possible to ensure that more
of those assisted to move away from the streets sustain their
move and do not enter the "revolving door" of rough
sleeping?:
— 36% were contacted on the streets
after leaving hostel, rolling shelter, second stage or permanent
accommodation prior to their first street contact in 2003 (28%
in 2002);
— 11% (205) of those referred or
diverted off the streets in 2003 had been assisted to move away
from the streets more than five times before 2003.
— How can the availability of permanent
move on accommodation be increased?
However, despite the challenges in alleviating
rough sleeping that remain, this report does indicate that achievements
are being made in tackling this issue in London (see flow chart):
— In 2003 and 2002, more rough sleepers
worked with were assisted to move off the streets than were not.
— More clients each year are being
assisted to move off the streets (1,809 in 2003; 1,915 in 2002)
than are being newly contacted (1,415 in 2003; 1,763 in 2002).
— In 2003 a notably higher proportion
(63%) of clients worked with on the streets by London outreach
teams accessed hostel/rolling shelter/second stage accommodation
compared to 2002 (43%).
— 72% of those referred or diverted
off the streets in 2003 had not returned to the streets by the
end of 2003 (81% in 2002).
— In 2003 a smaller proportion of departures
from hostels/rolling shelters/second stage accommodation were
due to evictions (22%); and a large proportion were due to a planned
move (50%), compared to 2002 (32% and 34%).
— Only 6% (26) of people leaving RSI
accommodation in 2003 were contacted on the streets in 2003 following
the end of their tenancy (7% in 2002). Those leaving RSI accommodation
in 2003 who were subsequently contacted on the streets had increased
only to 11% (45) as of the end of July 2004 (same % in 2003).
From this it is evident that improvements are
being made to the lives of current and former rough sleepers,
and progress is being made in assisting people to move off the
streets and sustain a life away from rough sleeping. It is important
to build on these successes in order to maintain the reduction
in the numbers of people sleeping rough in London.
ALL PACKED UP WITH NOWHERE TO GO
A report into the growing need of permanent
housing for London's single homeless people
"The homeless were heard for once.
[I now] feel like I am someone who has a voice and my voice was
given a chance to speak".
INTRODUCTION
Broadway is a London based charity working to
ensure that every single person finds and keeps a home. We provide
a range of services from street to home for 2,000 vulnerable individuals
when they need it. We work with and encourage other agencies that
support homeless people to push forward the barriers of good practice.
The shortage of affordable housing, across the
UK and in particular London, has been widely documented and evidenced.
What has not been so widely documented or included in the debate
are the views and solutions of those people directly affected
by the shortage of affordable housing; single homeless people.
"if you are homeless and you have no kids
and if you have no woman, even if you are sick
you are at the bottom of the pile."
In March 2004, Broadway held a Speak Out planned
and developed with our clients. The Speak Out aimed:
— To give our clients the opportunity
to voice their views, frustrations and solutions to move on
— To enable our clients to speak directly
to key official figures to raise their concerns
Over 150 of Broadway's clients attended from
across all forms of our accommodation and services; from rough
sleepers to people in supported permanent properties as well as
people who were no longer clients of Broadway. The day consisted
of a selection of workshops[16]and
ended with a Big Debate[17]
Throughout the day, the clients supported each
other and had clear messages for themselves, future generations
of homeless people and organisations who offer services to them.
It is the role of agencies such as Broadway to work with clients,
both current and future, to prepare them for moving on and to
manage their expectations.
The aim of this paper is to distribute the views
of our clients to a wider audience. It is divided into three sections:
1. Why focus the event on the shortage of
permanent housing?
2. A summary of our clients' concerns and
views on the problems of failing to move through supported accommodation
quickly.
3. A summary of our clients' main solutions
to the problems.
WHY FOCUS
THE EVENT
ON THE
SHORTAGE OF
PERMANENT HOUSING?
The shortage of affordable housing
Much has been done to highlight the shortage
of affordable housing in London and across the UK in general.
The following two facts serve to reiterate the point:
— The Barker Review believes that there
is a need to build 17,000 affordable and social homes per year.
Furthermore, to reduce the backlog of people's housing need, up
to an additional 9,000 homes need to be built[18]
— Since the introduction of Right to
Buy, in 1979, over 260,000 social rented homes have been sold
in London[19]
Levels of homelessness: a rising tide
Against this backdrop of the shortage of affordable
housing, we are faced with the fact new people continue to become
homeless. In London the following figure paints a bleak picture:
— 52% (1,423), of the 2,761 people
contacted by outreach teams in 2002 were new clients[20]
There are also increasing numbers of homeless
people in temporary accommodation across London, with nowhere
to go.
— 14,000 people are estimated to be
living in hostels of whom 30% are ready to move on but have nowhere
to move on to[21]
Impact upon the homelessness sector
For the homeless sector offering a link to the
next step in a person's housing journey has always been a challenge,
but over the past few years this has become dramatically harder.
Competition for affordable housing in London has become fiercer
and involves more groups than just those who are homeless. The
impact of agencies' inability to move people on means that hostels
and supported housing provision is being denied to those people
who are currently sleeping on the streets. Many of the traditional
routes that the sector have used to access permanent housing have
either come to an end of their funding; the scheme in its current
format has closed or they are simply feeling the same pinch of
the shortage of affordable housing that everyone across London
is.
The following illustrate this point:
— The Clearing House, a pan London
and Broadway managed, Government funded service, provides a pool
of 3,950 properties. These are ring fenced for ex-rough sleepers.
Funding for new properties has now ended, but those in the properties
are successfully sustaining their tenancies. The end result being
that from now the only new properties available via the Clearing
House will be re lets unless new funding becomes available.
— HOMES[22]has
ended in its current format, in particular the scheme which provided
move on for homeless people in London with low to no support needs.
Albeit a voluntary scheme, it provided valuable and essential
permanent accommodation for homeless people not accepted as statutorily
homeless. Broadway only moved on an average of 57 people per year
for the past three years; but for these people HOMES was their
only available option[23]
— Individual nominations with Registered
Social Landlords (RSLs) have become the main option available
to move homeless people into permanent accommodation. 62% of homeless
people are currently moved on through this route[24]With
the conflicting demands on RSLs to house statutorily homeless
households and key workers, single homeless people and childless
couples are a low priority group competing for the ever dwindling
stock of affordable housing.
At Broadway we are facing the direct effect
of these changes: we have recently had to increase the average
length of stay in our direct access hostels from three to six
months, our nominations to the Clearing House have been reduced
and we can no longer move clients on through HOMES.
CLIENTS' VIEWS
AND CONCERNS
The aims of the Speak Out were to give our clients
the opportunity to articulate their views and frustrations on
the lack of accommodation and to enable them to put these across
to policy makers.
This section is based directly on the contributions
and client quotes made on the day via:
— Discussions in workshops.
— Variety of feedback forms.
The overall message from our clients is that
they are feeling frustrated and disheartened.
"How long will it take [to find permanent
accommodation]? Where will I move to? And will it happen?"
The huge impact of finding permanent accommodation
on homeless people's lives was also a theme for the day:
"It [having permanent accommodation] keeps
mind, body, soul together to prevent ill health and burden on
the NHS."
THE BIG
ISSUES
The following represents the main points raised
by clients around defining and explaining the shortage of affordable
housing issue.
(a) Shortage of affordable housing and empty
properties;
Both the lack of new build housing and empty
properties in the capital were felt to be major factors:
"There aren't enough properties ready for
homeless people at this stage because those already housed in
these properties [hostels and supported housing] aren't moved
through the system fast enough."
"There are loads of flats and houses available,
but they are unused. These houses/flats could be put to use by
homeless people in need, if only we were given the chance."
(b) Private rented sector;
While some felt that the private rented sector
could be one solution to the shortage of affordable housing, several
major barriers were identified:
— The private rented sector does not
offer the same security of tenure that permanent social housing
does.
— Private landlords do not accept or
are very reluctant to accept people who are in receipt of benefits.
— Housing benefit may not always pay
on time so landlords choose not to accept people who have to rely
on benefits to pay their rent.
(c) Difficulties of accessing services;
One of the major issues that came out from clients
across all three workshops and the big debate was the difficulty
in accessing services.
This broke down into three main, but not exhaustive,
issues:
(1) The first centred around people not
fitting the "criteria":
"Single homeless people have to be mentally
ill or have drug or alcohol problems if they are to access services—there
is nothing for homeless people without these issues."
(2) Secondly people who are sleeping on
friends and families floors' find it difficult to access services
available for homeless people as they are not sleeping on the
streets.
(3) Finally couples living together find
there are few services for them as the majority of services are
geared for either single homeless people or homeless families.
It was felt that services are geared towards
people with a high support need or those who were coming out of
institutions such as prison. The end result is that there are
no or few services for clients with low to no support needs[25]It
was felt that the longer a person stays on the streets or in a
hostel the more their situation deteriorates because there is
no structure to life on the streets — it can often lead
to crime and drugs.
(d) Stigmatisation of homeless people;
Clients felt that homeless people are labelled
as "afflicted or addicted". These stereotypes and negative
images held by "society" continue for as long as a person
remains homeless. As a result they are unfairly treated, judged
and categorised[26]
"Life on the streets makes you defensive
and used to being at the bottom of the pile."
HOPES AND
FEARS OF
MOVING ON
Throughout the day, clients were invited to
give their comments on what they thought about moving into permanent
accommodation.
A key "hope" is for;
"The security of being settled and not having
to worry that one wrong step will leave you sleeping rough."
Clients felt that having permanent accommodation,
where you are able to access support, if or when needed, would
provide security and would improve their health, mental and physical.
Many people felt that having a permanent home/address would enable
them to rejoin society.
"Living in permanent accommodation leads
to social acceptability, thus makes it ok to get work and contribute
to the economy of the country."
"Your credibility improves."
For many an address would help them overcome
the stigmatisation that homeless people have thereby placing them
in a better situation to re-establish contact with friends or
family "to build up what broke up; ex-families & friends"
or to find a job.
Many of the clients, however, were realistic
in their expectations of how life would be after they had moved
into a home. Those who had moved on shared their experiences and
felt that there was much that people could do to prepare themselves
for future life, for example by addressing their support needs
and attending pre-tenancy training[27]
"Don't put too much emphasis on believing
that once you have moved on, everything will be perfect."
(i) "Moving on with your life and managing
your tenancy"
(ii) "Experiences and barriers to move
on"
(iii) "Alternative solutions to move on".
CLIENTS' SOLUTIONS
What is outlined below is a list of changes,
developments and solutions that clients would like to see. These
may not be innovative or ground breaking, but they are the solutions
that people currently homeless identify as important and relevant.
(a) Prioritise homeless people on the government's
agenda;
Many of the clients felt that "those in
power" did not adequately understand their situation nor
were they doing enough to work with agencies to tackle the issue
of homelessness.
"[After being here today] I feel as though
maybe some people in authority will take a bit more action and
notice."
It is clear that services are being developed
and the issue of the shortage of affordable housing is being widely
recognised. Government and pan-London level responses focus on
the priority of key workers given the commitment by John Prescott,
Deputy Prime Minister. More funding has been announced by Central
Government but with no direct focus on supported housing.
Whilst this was not explicitly stated the issue
of accessing services suggest that what is needed is a change
in the process of accessing housing—becoming homeless should
not be a person's only option. With the development of Supporting
People, the extension of the Homelessness Act and the focus on
key worker housing, now is an ideal juncture to review the situation
in London.
(d) Address issues in the private rented
sector;
Clients felt that the private rented sector
can be a viable option. However, it is clear that if the private
rented sector is to begin to play a bigger role in tackling the
shortage of affordable housing then there are certain issues that
would need to be considered:
— More rent deposit schemes should
be developed to help people who cannot pay the deposit.
— Landlords should be encouraged to
accept people who are in receipt of benefits.
— The private rented sector rents should
be capped to make it more affordable.
— More reputable lettings agents should
be established who will provide housing options to those on low
incomes.
(e) Bring more empty properties back into
use;
Empty properties was an issue causing particular
frustration. In the words of one client;
"Empty homes should be made available to
the homeless who could repair them if necessary."
(f) Improvements to services from Local Authorities/RSLs
There were a number of points specifically for Local Authorities:
— Develop greater appropriate customer
focus.
The clients felt that when going to the local
authorities for help and support, they often came up against brick
walls. Forms and information are given, but the help to either
understand the information or to complete the applications is
not.
Having high support needs can make the process
of approaching Local Authorities to access support or housing
incredibly daunting.
Local Authorities should place their staff within
day centres to assess applications and understand the difficulties
that homeless people face eg dyslexia, learning difficulties,
mental health problems.
— Recognise in its services and funding
that homelessness is about more than a roof.
Local Authorities have come a long way in recognising
this, but it remains the case as ever that there is more needed
to develop greater partnership working, for example with health
and drugs and alcohol.
(g) Developments in services offered by homelessness
agencies;
There were a number of points specifically for
homelessness agencies:
— Rights and responsibilities.
Homeless people should have a reciprocal contract
with hostels where they have roles and responsibilities within
the hostel and the hostel undertakes to ensure their move on.
This would provide an incentive to stay on, change one's life
and also increase the hope and promise of permanent accommodation.
— Additional support to manage with
independent living.
For example help to understand and complete council
tax, benefit forms, via key work, training sessions etc.
— Employment opportunities.
Clients felt that they had direct knowledge of
the problems homeless people face. Therefore they felt that they
would like to have more opportunities to become employed within
the sector, once they have moved on.
BROADWAY'S
COMMITMENT
The following points demonstrate Broadway's
commitment to respond to the points raised on the day, based within
the constraints of the current housing situation.
— Broadway will continue to support
its clients in a flexible and appropriate manner for as long as
they require the support.
— Broadway supports and prepares clients
in their journey to find and keep a home.
— Broadway is committed to extending
and developing its pre-tenancy training programme to clients across
its services as well as continuing to train external agencies
to use its package.
— Broadway has developed and manages
a befriending scheme for clients.
— Broadway has developed a unique approach
to deliver basic skills training to enable clients to improve
their literacy, numeracy and communication skills.
— Broadway has developed an IT training
programme and access to qualifications such as the European Driving
Licence.
— Broadway is investigating the possibility
of establishing a rent deposit scheme.
— Broadway is investigating the possibility
of developing reciprocal arrangements with other homelessness
agencies to employ clients.
CONCLUSION
Homeless people's views are one view among many,
however, their views that are often not considered. We hope that
all agencies will seek to act upon these points outlined and we
would welcome the opportunity to work with agencies to develop
more responsive and effective services. There is a lot to be said
for listening and involving these clients in the debate; both
in terms of improving services, but also in terms of enabling
and supporting clients on their journey to find and keep a home.
Broadway would like to acknowledge and thank
all the clients involved in the planning and preparation of the
Speak Out as well as those who attended and contributed so actively
on the day. Without you and your contribution it would not have
been possible and such a success.
14 London HIP Figures 2003, Homelessness and Housing
Support Directorate, ODPM. Back
15
People new to the streets or new to an area that the London outreach
teams cover. Back
16
The workshops were: Back
17
The panel for the Big Debate consisted of: Elaine Elkington. Director
of Housing, Hammersmith and Fulham; Andy Love MP; Don Wood, Chief
Executive London and Quadrant Housing Group and Mark Grant, Deputy
Chief Executive, Broadway. Back
18
Barker Review of Housing Supply 2004. Back
19
Right to Buy data. ODPM. 2003. Back
20
Annual Rough Sleepers Report, CHAIN. Broadway 2003. Back
21
GLA Silting Up. April 2003. Back
22
HOMES stood for Housing Mobility and Exchange Services. Back
23
This includes Broadway clients and clients from other agencies
across the sector. Back
24
GLA Silting Up. April 2003. Back
25
This will become even more pertinent as the impact of affordable
housing impacts upon more people. More people will find themselves
homeless, but there will not be services established to respond
to this need. Back
26
Here the clients were clear that those behaving anti-socially
should not be ignored and should be tackled, as should any other
group of society. They were drawing attention to the fact that
they felt unfairly discriminated against. Back
27
Broadway runs the Real Housing Course-a pre-tenancy training course
designed to enable clients to understand how to manage their tenancy.
Broadway also makes available to clients the on-line handbook,
Its Your Move, a reference book for clients. Back
| 
