Supporting homeless people: Have new legal duties made a difference?

The provision of housing support is recognised as an important aspect of both preventing homelessness and assisting people who become homeless. The Housing (Scotland) Act 2010 introduced a new duty for local authorities to provide housing support to homeless households. This came into effect on 1st June 2013. The aim of this report is to make a preliminary assessment of the impact of the new duty after 6 months and the extent to which hopes or fears have materialised.

The report has been compiled from information collected from local authority officials through a short informal telephone interview. A total of 27 authorities were interviewed in late 2013 and the first quarter of 2014.



Quite a number of authorities said that the new duty had a minimal impact as yet because they felt they were already providing the services required by the duty. Others reported that the new duty had resulted in more formalisation of existing procedures including making homeless people aware of their new rights to support and of appeal if support was not assessed as needed. In some cases authorities had experienced increases in demand, but this was not always due to the new duty. A number of authorities felt the duty had strengthened their corporate approach and there was some sense that it had helped to secure additional resources or to protect resources.



The main changes in the assessment process had been the introduction of more formalised processes. In some cases there had also been a more consistent approach among external agencies and also closer working between authority departments. One authority also mentioned linking in assessment and service delivery to the implementation of Self Directed Support. A number of authorities had introduced new customised software programmes to get consistent recording of assessments, delivery and outcomes.



In some areas internal re-organisations had taken place, often involving more effective collaboration between internal services and in others a more consistent approach had been taken among external providers. Various levels of support were being offered with some development of both intensive support for people with multiple needs and drop in support for those with lower levels of need. Two areas mentioned specialised services for young people.



All authorities had to make an adaptation of their systems to provide the additional data for the Scottish Government homelessness recording form (HL1 form) and this was felt by some to have been an additional burden on overstretched resources.



It seems that the new duty has resulted in more consistency of services in that a number of authorities have introduced more formalised processes to comply with the new duty. It is difficult to know the extent to which people seeking help from authorities are aware of their new rights and are able to use them. There also seems to be limited signs of the new duty stimulating new developments in the ways support is provided. Fears that the duty would result in an unmanageable level of demand do not appear to have been realised, partly because the preventative approach to homelessness has reduced the numbers to whom the duty applies.



The duty does seem to have encouraged a more corporate approach in many authorities, though not in all.



The duty has resulted in additional resources for housing support in some areas and the safeguarding of resources in others, but in some areas has been seen as an additional burden not matched by funds to meet it.