Ending street homelessness: what works and why we don’t do it

Peter Mackie, Sarah Johnsen, Jenny Wood

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Vast human and financial resources have been spent in efforts to understand and address street homelessness. Yet, the problem persists. This think piece summarises the findings of a major review exploring the international evidence base on what works to end street homelessness (Mackie et al., 2017). It also reflects on the question: ‘if we know what works, why don’t we do it?’ Informed by more than 500 literature sources and interviews with 11 international experts, it identifies the key principles which appear to improve the likelihood of interventions ending street homelessness. These include: be housing-led, offer person-centred support and choice, take swift action, employ assertive outreach leading to a suitable accommodation offer, ensure services address wider support needs, and collaborate effectively between agencies and across sectors. The article also identifies seven reasons why those responding don’t always do what is known to work. If street homelessness is to be ended then we must address: the lack of settled accommodation, funding challenges, ineffective collaboration and commissioning, the needs of different subgroups, ineligibility of some people for publicly funded support, overly bureaucratic processes, and the need for stronger political will.
LanguageEnglish
Pages85-96
JournalEuropean Journal of Homelessness
Volume13
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Fingerprint

homelessness
accommodation
funding
housing
expert
human being
lack
interview
resources
evidence

Cite this

@article{fc0fa376cb1e44f1b7ef43f6af6ce32e,
title = "Ending street homelessness: what works and why we don’t do it",
abstract = "Vast human and financial resources have been spent in efforts to understand and address street homelessness. Yet, the problem persists. This think piece summarises the findings of a major review exploring the international evidence base on what works to end street homelessness (Mackie et al., 2017). It also reflects on the question: ‘if we know what works, why don’t we do it?’ Informed by more than 500 literature sources and interviews with 11 international experts, it identifies the key principles which appear to improve the likelihood of interventions ending street homelessness. These include: be housing-led, offer person-centred support and choice, take swift action, employ assertive outreach leading to a suitable accommodation offer, ensure services address wider support needs, and collaborate effectively between agencies and across sectors. The article also identifies seven reasons why those responding don’t always do what is known to work. If street homelessness is to be ended then we must address: the lack of settled accommodation, funding challenges, ineffective collaboration and commissioning, the needs of different subgroups, ineligibility of some people for publicly funded support, overly bureaucratic processes, and the need for stronger political will.",
author = "Peter Mackie and Sarah Johnsen and Jenny Wood",
year = "2019",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "85--96",
journal = "European Journal of Homelessness",
issn = "2030-2762",
number = "1",

}

Ending street homelessness: what works and why we don’t do it. / Mackie, Peter; Johnsen, Sarah; Wood, Jenny.

In: European Journal of Homelessness, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2019, p. 85-96.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ending street homelessness: what works and why we don’t do it

AU - Mackie, Peter

AU - Johnsen, Sarah

AU - Wood, Jenny

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - Vast human and financial resources have been spent in efforts to understand and address street homelessness. Yet, the problem persists. This think piece summarises the findings of a major review exploring the international evidence base on what works to end street homelessness (Mackie et al., 2017). It also reflects on the question: ‘if we know what works, why don’t we do it?’ Informed by more than 500 literature sources and interviews with 11 international experts, it identifies the key principles which appear to improve the likelihood of interventions ending street homelessness. These include: be housing-led, offer person-centred support and choice, take swift action, employ assertive outreach leading to a suitable accommodation offer, ensure services address wider support needs, and collaborate effectively between agencies and across sectors. The article also identifies seven reasons why those responding don’t always do what is known to work. If street homelessness is to be ended then we must address: the lack of settled accommodation, funding challenges, ineffective collaboration and commissioning, the needs of different subgroups, ineligibility of some people for publicly funded support, overly bureaucratic processes, and the need for stronger political will.

AB - Vast human and financial resources have been spent in efforts to understand and address street homelessness. Yet, the problem persists. This think piece summarises the findings of a major review exploring the international evidence base on what works to end street homelessness (Mackie et al., 2017). It also reflects on the question: ‘if we know what works, why don’t we do it?’ Informed by more than 500 literature sources and interviews with 11 international experts, it identifies the key principles which appear to improve the likelihood of interventions ending street homelessness. These include: be housing-led, offer person-centred support and choice, take swift action, employ assertive outreach leading to a suitable accommodation offer, ensure services address wider support needs, and collaborate effectively between agencies and across sectors. The article also identifies seven reasons why those responding don’t always do what is known to work. If street homelessness is to be ended then we must address: the lack of settled accommodation, funding challenges, ineffective collaboration and commissioning, the needs of different subgroups, ineligibility of some people for publicly funded support, overly bureaucratic processes, and the need for stronger political will.

M3 - Article

VL - 13

SP - 85

EP - 96

JO - European Journal of Homelessness

T2 - European Journal of Homelessness

JF - European Journal of Homelessness

SN - 2030-2762

IS - 1

ER -