This report shines a light on the predicament facing single homeless adults, who often struggle to access mainstream housing options and so end up cycling in and out of low-quality temporary accommodation, which has impacts on their health and creates future costs for local services.
Here is the report:
It was produced by IPPR in february 2016. they said;

“Too many single homeless households do not get full state support to find a permanent place to live. The absence of housing options during times of personal crisis means that many single homeless adults are driven towards the most dreadful corners of the English housing market, forced to live in bed-and-breakfast accommodation, private hostels and short-stay houses in multiple occupation (known collectively as ‘unsupported temporary accommodation’). The physical and social conditions in these dwellings are often appalling. There is limited statutory control over who is placed or directed to the accommodation, and enforcement activity on the conditions of dwellings and quality of the management is often found wanting.

Part of the problem is that this is a group of hidden homeless households, and their plight and housing largely go unseen and undocumented. As a result there are no accurate estimates of the number of single homeless households living in B&Bs or good records of the number of bedspaces this sector provides. Previous estimates have suggested the problem is considerable: for instance, research by Shelter suggests that single homeless use of private B&Bs and hostels is 5–10 times greater than is reported in quarterly government data (see Credland 2004, Crisis 2006).

The practical and policy interventions in this report are structured around the four stages of a typical stay, with a view to providing support at each stage and breaking the cycle many people face as they move into, out of and back into unsupported temporary accommodation. We seek to repair the ‘control deficit’ that many tenants feel when they move into unsupported temporary accommodation, and also to build their experiences into a positive ‘feedback loop’ between tenants and local actors.

Rather than rely on the Westminster government’s agenda in this area, we propose local but system-wide changes designed to empower tenants to have more control over their own journey, and to have a positive impact on the health and wellbeing of the people who live in unsupported temporary accommodation.

Key recommendations