{"id":15916,"date":"2020-12-16T09:00:48","date_gmt":"2020-12-16T14:00:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wordpress-537697-2997182.cloudwaysapps.com\/?p=15916"},"modified":"2020-12-15T12:08:25","modified_gmt":"2020-12-15T17:08:25","slug":"will-the-pandemic-change-how-england-addresses-homelessness","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wordpress-537697-2997182.cloudwaysapps.com\/will-the-pandemic-change-how-england-addresses-homelessness\/","title":{"rendered":"Will the Pandemic Change How England Addresses Homelessness?"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

Of the many surprises thrown up by 2020, the UK\u2019s Conservative government announcing in April that it had met its five-year target for reducing homelessness in England in just two days was one of the more positive.<\/p>\n

The real story, predictably, was more complicated than that. But it did begin simply enough: with an email.<\/p>\n

Dame Louise Casey, a member of the UK\u2019s House of Lords with a long career in tackling homelessness issues, messaged all 343 local authorities (called councils) in England asking for an \u201cunusual effort\u201d amid \u201cunusual times\u201d.<\/p>\n

While councils do provide accommodation for eligible applicants through local housing authorities in \u201cnormal times\u201d, they are usually tasked with<\/a>\u00a0focusing on early intervention to prevent homelessness. As anyone who has walked down an English high street will know, many people fall through the cracks.<\/p>\n

So on March 25th, with a pandemic looming and a national lockdown coming into effect, Dame Louise\u2019s email was clear. Councils needed to find a way to get \u201ceveryone in\u201d.<\/p>\n

How Did It Work?<\/h3>\n

The programme, which was officially dubbed \u201cEveryone In\u201d, saw councils set about finding self-contained accommodation, food and medical support for every rough sleeper on their radar. Crucially, this included people living in shelters and hostels, places where high numbers of Covid-19 cases were seen elsewhere. It also included people previously not considered \u201chigh priority\u201d, and those ineligible for any housing support. This included the \u201cintentionally homeless\u201d and migrants and asylum seekers with \u201cno recourse to public funds<\/a>\u201d.<\/p>\n

Councils had access to a \u00a33.2 million emergency pot to help with the effort. They began housing people in empty hotels, apartments, student accommodation and flats, with support from charities and the NHS.<\/p>\n

By early May, over 5,000 people had been brought off the streets, around 1,400 of them in London, ending the majority of rough sleeping in England. (As a devolved issue, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland\u00a0have followed their own initiatives during this period.)<\/p>\n

Jasmine Basran, a policy manager at homelessness charity Crisis, said this had an \u201cincredible\u201d effect. People who had previously been denied support due to their immigration status or other factors were being housed. Some of them had been on the streets for years. Finally, they could access both a comfortable space, medical and addiction support services, help with benefits claims and more.<\/p>\n

Cracks in the Plan<\/h3>\n

Even at this early stage, it was never truly \u201ceveryone\u201d. The sudden economic fallout from the pandemic, combined with new rules on social distancing and restrictions on movement, meant hundreds of people became newly-homeless during this period.<\/p>\n

In late April, the mayor of Manchester Andy Burnham said that while the Greater Manchester Combined Authority had housed 1,140 homeless people during the lockdown, around 115 people across the region were still sleeping rough. The Greater London Authority said between 400 and 600 people were sleeping rough in the capital in the same period.<\/p>\n

The restrictive and isolating nature of being placed into such accommodation proved difficult for some people to handle, Basran noted. This rang particularly true if they were homeless for a long time or had mental health or substance abuse issues. Some might have been placed far from where they are usually based, or struggle with the restrictive nature of lockdown life.<\/p>\n

Still, the first stage of \u201cEveryone In\u201d was widely applauded; and it saved lives. A study in medical journal The Lancet, published in September, estimated that 21,092 Covid-19 cases, 1,164 hospital admissions and 266 deaths were avoided as a result of the scheme.<\/p>\n

What Happened Next?<\/h3>\n

How the end of \u201cEveryone In\u201d played out \u2013 in fact, whether it ended at all \u2013 depends on who you ask.<\/p>\n

Over the summer, with lockdown restrictions lifting, reports emerged of confusion among councils over what their centrally-mandated duties were on homelessness. Contracts with hotels and other accommodation providers began to end. Whether an \u201cEveryone In\u201d policy continued to be pursued, and how the transition of thousands of people out of accommodation was managed, became a matter of local decision-making, largely affected by the resources of specific councils.<\/p>\n

As of November, more than 29,000 people had been housed in emergency accommodation since the pandemic began. Two-thirds of these individuals were moved into settled accommodation. That\u2019s according to the government<\/a>, which has denied the \u201cEveryone In\u201d scheme was officially brought to a close.<\/p>\n

It has made several funding announcements:<\/p>\n