About

Following a Rapid Evidence Assessment Centre for Homelessness Impact and RSM, a deep dive into the interaction between criminal justice and homelessness and rough sleeping systems took place.

People leaving prison face significant homelessness risk due to multiple, interconnecting factors:

Housing and financial barriers: Loss of accommodation and rent arrears during imprisonment; inadequate support to maintain housing; Local Housing Allowance rates that make private rental unaffordable, especially for under-35s limited to shared accommodation rates.

Discrimination and stigma: Landlords frequently refuse to rent to people with criminal records; certain offence types (particularly sex offences) face greater challenges due to safety concerns.

Individual circumstances: Short sentences limit access to support services; people on remand have minimal resettlement planning; relationship breakdowns and institutionalisation create additional barriers; disrupted mental health and substance use care makes securing stable housing difficult.

Intersectional challenges: Many people experience multiple issues simultaneously. Women face particular difficulties related to shorter sentences and experiences of trauma or violence.

Findings in Brief

‍Current Support Systems

What's working: Community Accommodation Service Tier 3 (CAS3) provides 84 nights of transitional housing with floating support for benefits, substance use and mental health access. Resettlement panels and rehabilitative services facilitate good collaboration between criminal justice and housing sectors in some areas.

Key challenges: Short-term support can defer rather than resolve homelessness risk as finding settled housing remains difficult. Structural barriers include limited housing stock, affordability issues, and capacity constraints in mental health services and adult social care. Specific groups (high support needs, remand, women) lack tailored support. Digital exclusion, benefit delays and insufficient partnership working hinder outcomes.

Gaps in provision: No continuity of mental health and substance use care after release; limited move-on housing options; lack of transitional support for independent living; there is no support for the 'medium needs' group (who don't have priority need but need some tenancy support).

System complexity: Pathways from prison to accommodation are inconsistent and highly variable. Fragmented data collection across services impedes comprehensive analysis and policy development.‍

The Accommodation for Ex-Offenders (AfEO) Programme

Performance: Referrals increased 30% from Phase 1 to Phase 2, with 2,562 tenancies secured (12% increase). However, no sampled local authority met their tenancy targets due to lack of affordable private rental housing. Nationally, 65% of people maintained accommodation for over six months; 60% of exits were successful graduations. It was not possible to assess overall programme success as targets were absent for most outcomes.

Positive consequences: Stronger partnerships between local authorities, probation, prisons and employment services; improved understanding of local needs and better support for vulnerable groups.

Negative consequences: Tensions with other vulnerable groups on waiting lists; limited women's referrals as their high support needs weren't met during shorter sentences; broad eligibility (anyone within 12 months of leaving custody) limited space for people moving from CAS3; regional disparities and lack of standardisation created inconsistent implementation.

Policy Insights

Service Provision

1. Identify housing needs early in prison sentences or remand and develop personalised housing plans finalised before release, allowing time for probation and housing team collaboration.
   ‍
2. Incorporate tenancy skills training into support plans, including budgeting, bill payment and understanding tenancy agreements.
   ‍
3. Establish dedicated local authority roles for supporting prison leavers at risk of homelessness, with staff co-located in prisons at least one day weekly to bridge service gaps.
   ‍
4. Revise the Homelessness Code of Guidance to address ambiguities creating inconsistent support, ensure fair priority need assessments, and reduce gatekeeping. Provide training for housing and probation teams.
   ‍
5. Establish women-only supported housing with trauma-informed care, staffed by trained professionals, located near support networks (where safe) for mental health and addiction services.
   ‍
6. Explore support options for people on remand, potentially expanding CAS3 and the Accommodation for Ex-Offenders programme to help maintain housing and safeguard belongings.

Collaboration

7. Explore dedicated welfare benefits leads to support timely benefit access for people leaving custody. Pilot test whether the role works best within prisons, housing, probation or Jobcentre Plus.
   ‍
8. Explore consistent liaison teams with prison, probation and local health representatives meeting regularly to review cases and streamline referrals. Investigate why RECONNECT service isn't being used as intended.
   ‍
9. Establish a unified data system integrating prison, probation and housing data with secure access controls. Develop clear Duty to Refer protocols and provide staff training on data sharing.
   ‍
10. Establish a cross-agency task force (housing authorities, probation, community organisations) to develop standardised property condition checklists, conduct inspections and provide compliance training.
    ‍
11. Create an inter-agency housing coordination committee with representatives from relevant government departments, meeting monthly to review needs, share data and develop integrated policies.

Cost-Effectiveness

12. Undertake research and evaluation to test feasibility of cost-effective approaches, including collecting data on financial and logistical benefits and piloting in small areas.

Data Collection

13. Agree collective outcome definitions (homelessness, rough sleeping, settled accommodation) and share with organisations collecting monitoring data to reduce inconsistencies across programmes and areas.
    ‍
14. Explore feasibility of person-level data collection for Management Information and secondary datasets, working with local areas and government departments to review data collection, sharing requirements, quality checks and aggregation processes.

‍