EveryYouth CEO Nicholas Connolly says the lack of ambition in our support structures fails to address the root causes of youth homelessness:
The new Housing Secretary, Steve Reed, has issued a “call to arms” to developers and vowed to “build, baby build”, alongside the promise of 1.5 million “affordable” homes. Apparently, this is the government plan to end the youth homelessness crisis in the UK.
But single homeless young people will not benefit from these new houses: they can’t afford the so-called affordable homes, and they won’t be given new social homes because they do not have housing priority. Many local authorities won’t even accept them on to waiting lists, on which there are already 1.33 million households in limbo.
The government doesn’t appear to understand the issue it is trying to solve. Youth homelessness is a symptom of failing support systems for struggling families. The care system relies on professionals noticing something is amiss and acting upon it. Inevitably children are missed. How many? It’s hard to prove, but small-scale research within the EveryYouth Network suggests 60% of children who urgently need support are falling through the gaps. The pathway to youth homelessness starts here.
If the government implements a system that proactively identifies children whose families are unable to provide the emotional and practical support they need, far fewer children will become homeless young people. A system based on Upstream, a project pioneered in the UK by EveryYouth charity Llamau, would achieve significant results. In Australia a similar model reduced youth homeless presentation by 40%!
And then what happens to young people who still become homeless? Currently the system, which the housing secretary is doubling down on, focusses on helping young people find stable [social] housing. But is that what they, or we, want?
A total of 118,000 young people faced homelessness last year – that’s one young person every four minutes – and the number is likely to be much higher due to hidden homelessness. The problem is increasing every year – which is alarming – but this number is dwarfed by the number of job vacancies in the UK (728,000, according the ONS). An online jobs board estimates 209,778 of these vacancies are entry-level jobs, a five-year low.
“In a period where the economy is stuttering badly, there are nearly twice as many entry-level job vacancies as there are young people facing homelessness, but the sole policy response is to build more affordable homes. Where’s the ambition?”
In a period where the economy is stuttering, badly, there are nearly twice as many entry level job vacancies as there are young people facing homeless, but the sole policy response is to build more affordable homes. Where’s the ambition? Why not help young people overcome the reasons they are homeless so they can build a life of their choosing?
It is crucial to recognise here that most young people who are categorised as homeless by local authorities are housed in temporary supported accommodation. They are not rough sleepers for whom Housing First type solutions are designed. The question is, should our youth homelessness systems warehouse young people until sufficiently state-subsidised housing becomes available? Or should we invest heavily in young people in temporary housing so many never need state-subsidised housing?
The lack of ambition in our support structures – the lack of hope, frankly – ensures we write hundreds of thousands of young people off without ever giving them a chance. The government may claim its new apprenticeships will help but mainstream opportunities have proven unsuitable for most homeless young people and the reasons are clear.
Research in Wales suggests around 40% of young people experiencing homelessness have experienced four or more adverse childhood experiences – ranging from witnessing domestic violence and addiction to experiencing abuse and neglect – but the waiting lists for counselling and therapy to address this trauma are huge. Housing won’t address this.
Research of comparable cohorts suggests around half of young people in homelessness services are neurodivergent, but it is almost impossible to secure a diagnosis, so they do not benefit from the help they are entitled to. Housing won’t address this.
The Albert Kennedy Trust estimates 25% of homeless young people are LGBTQ+, many of whom have been rejected by their families. A profound trauma. Housing won’t address this.
Furthermore, most young people entering homelessness services are not in employment, education or training, with few qualifications or recognised skills to build on. But they are young so retain the neuroplasticity required to learn new skills and habits relatively easily. The homeless young people I meet want to work, they want a life they can be proud of, and they’re prepared to put in the effort, they just need a bit more help than their peers to get there. Housing won’t address this.
Even if the Government could build sufficient housing for all young people experiencing homelessness in the UK for the foreseeable future; what happens once they’re living on their own? Neuroplasticity reduces significantly as we age, to the extent that their chances of achieving their potential reduce markedly. Do we really want a system that hardwires low aspiration and dependency?
By investing in simple proactive efforts to identify children and families that need help so fewer young people fall through the safety net – and aspirational holistic support for those young people we miss – the government will also reduce the number of children and young people being excluded from school, becoming attracted to gangs, developing mental health problems and entering the justice system. It will also create a larger, more motivated workforce and improve social cohesion. It’s a no brainer.
All young people contribute to our collective well-being, for better or worse. By focusing on housing needs rather than young people’s needs the government is impoverishing us all.
