Folie 1

1

Evaluating homelessness prevention in the EU
Reflecting on the findings of a recent survey of
3,600 households in Germany
Presented by Volker Busch-Geertsema, senior
research fellow with GISS (Association for
Innovative Social Research and Social Planning),
Bremen, Germany to ESF SCSS Exploratory Workshop
Developing The EU Scientific Evidence Base on
Integrated Approaches to Prevent and Address
Homelessness, York, 26 - 28 March 2006
2
Prevention, a tricky concept

• Prevention is hard to define
• Different concepts of homelessness prevention
  could be classified in three categories of
  prevention (as it is done in criminology and
  medicine)
• Primary prevention
• influencing and minimising more general (and
  structural) causes of homelessness (housing
  market, minimum benefits, employment etc.)
• Secondary prevention
• crisis intervention in case of imminent threat of
  homelessness
• Tertiary prevention
• preventing homelessness which has occurred
  already from becoming worse or chronic, quick
  reintegration of homeless persons

3
Different categories of prevention and their
target groups
4
Prevention and re-integration. Difficult to draw
a line

• Support after re-housing reintegration or
  prevention of secondary homelessness?
• Coop-project final report, page 2-44/45 In the
  UK preventative services are still in their
  infancy with most preventative services to date
  focussed on preventing homelessness re-occurrence
  (through tenancy support)
• See also examples in The Prevention of
  Homelessness. An advice note issued by the Welsh
  Assembly Government, August 2004

5
The following research results are focussing on
secondary prevention of homelessness (crisis
intervention for households who are imminently
threatened with homelessness). The survey also
explored the extent of recurrent housing crises
among clients of prevention services.
6

Results of a research project on Personal and
Financial Support Measures for the Prevention of
Homelessness
(Authors Jürgen Evers, Ekke-Ulf Ruhstrat, Volker
Busch-Geertsema)
Part of large research network Homelessness and
Support for Households in Urgent Need of Housing
funded by the German Ministry of Science.
Cooperation of three research institutes with
national coalition of service providers for the
homeless (BAG W) as associated partner
7
Introduction / German Background (1)

• No right to housing in Germany
• Duty of municipalities to provide temporary
  accommo-dation for those who would otherwise be
  roofless
• Relatively strong legal protection of tenants
• Time-limited contracts only in very special
  circum-stances, unlimited contracts as a rule
• Evictions only possible with justified
  interests defined by tenancy legislation
• Most important reason for evictions rent arrears

8
Introduction / German Background (2)

• Tenancy legislation notice to quit becomes void
  if rent arrears are settled within two months
  after an eviction case was started in court (no
  repetition possible within two years)
• Social assistance legislation Rent arrears
  should be assumed if threatening homelessness can
  be prevented
• Municipal centres for the prevention of
  homelessness

• get information on households threatened by
  homelessness (from courts, housing providers,
  other social services and households themselves)
  and try to get in touch with them
• provide advice and assistance
• help negotiating with landlords (for repayment
  arrangements)
• decide on assumption of rent arrears
• arrange contact to other services if needed
  (intervention services in case of domestic
  violence, youth welfare services, special support
  in case of addiction, mental health problems,
  special social difficulties etc)
• (some) can arrange alternative housing options

9
Some of the questions to be answered by the
research project

• Profile of households at imminent risk of
  homelessness
• Reasons and causes for threatening homelessness
• Support needs of households at risk of
  homelessness
• Type and extend of support provided
• Frequency of recurrent housing crises

10
Survey methods

• Semi-standardised data collection of more than
  3,600 households in direct contact with municipal
  prevention services in 43 cities during 6 weeks
  period (last weeks of 2003)
• Four local case studies
• Face to face interviews with 20 households who
  were at risk of becoming homeless in the past

11
Households at imminent risk of homelessness
(gender specific household types) N 3,529
households
41.2
29.7
29.1
12
Gender of adult persons threatened with
homelessness (N 4,573)
13
Households threatened with homelessness compared
to household structure of German population
under 60
N 3,529 households
N 22,965,000 households (excluding those with
persons over 60)
Source National Statistical Office, microcensus
2002
14
Main income at time of imminent
homelessnessmultiple answers possible / N
2,989 households
62.6
30.5
39.3
percent
8.8
15
Reasons for imminent homelessness N 3,559
households / multiple answers possible
anti-social behaviour (2.7 ) loss of income /
rent too high (2.1 ) sanctions on transfer
income (1.3 ) turned out from parental home
(1) etc.
16
Reasons for imminent homelessness according to
household structuremultiple answers possible /
N 3,454 households
17
Support needs exceeding immediate intervention
to secure tenancymultiple answers possible / N
2,625 households
long-time protection of tenancy (2.8 )
illness/disability (1.9 ) general advice and
counselling (1.5 ) education / youth welfare (1
) etc.
18
Support needs exceeding immediate intervention
to secure tenancy with and without multiple
answers / N 2,625 households
multiple diagnosis 38 cases 1.4
59.9
of total 18.5
without multiple answers
19
Support needs exceeding immediate intervention to
secure tenancyaccording to household structure,
multiple answers possible / N 2,573 households
further support needs, because of ...
20
Recurrent housing crises Households threatened
with homelessness at time of survey which were in
similar crises once or several times in five
previous yearsexcluding unknown / N 3,166
households
21
Cases of recurrence Frequency of recurrent
housing crises in five years previous to present
crisisN 1,110 households
22
Frequency of recurrent housing crises in five
years previous to present crisisexcluding
unknown / N 3,166 households
23
Cases of recurrence Intervention of municipal
prevention service in previous housing crisisN
1,036 households
46.4
40.6
12.9
24
Cases of recurrence Type of support provided in
previous housing crisisN 570 households /
multiple answers possible
25
Cases of recurrence Further support needs in
previous and present crisisN 362 households
/ multiple answers possible
26
Summing-up (1)

• Rent arrears are the most important reason for
  imminent homelessness at least as far as
  clients of municipal prevention services are
  concerned. A majority of these clients but by
  far not all of them rely on transfer incomes.
  45 per cent of clients are women. Underlying
  causes of rent arrears are often other problems
  and support needs in addition to material
  poverty.
• While 30 of the households only need short term
  inter-ventions in order to secure their tenancy
  and for another 30 longer term support needs
  exclusively concern their (over-)indebtness, 40
  have other problems in addition to financial
  difficulties and need other types of support
  (because of addiction, mental health problems,
  special social difficulties etc.)

27
Summing up (2)

• As a rule the households threatened with
  homelessness need professional support. Our
  interviews show that successful prevention of
  homelessness depends much more on the way
  prevention services react to crises than on the
  problem histories of households concerned.
• In order to make preventive services more
  effective and to reduce problems of recurrence,
  improvements are necessary in the field of short
  term crisis intervention (realistic expectations
  concerning cooperation and self help potentials
  of households in crisis) as well as for long term
  support to secure tenancies after crisis
  intervention (e.g. by floating support).

28
European Dimension?

• In many countries unclear distribution of
  support needs among households threatened with
  eviction extent of repeat homelessness etc.
• Results depend to high degree on shape of
  services included
• High percentage of rent arrears seems to be
  similar in number of countries
• Reasons and backgrounds for rent arrears are much
  more difficult to standardise
• It would be difficult to operationalise similar
  study for different EU-countries
• Efforts to develop more differentiated definition
  of prevention could be fruitful and are
  absolutely necessary for common understanding
  across countries

29
Thanks for your attention!
30
Contact

• Gesellschaft für innovative Sozialforschung und
  Sozialplanung (GISS e.V.)Dr. Volker
  Busch-GeertsemaKohlhökerstraße 22D-28203 Bremen
  (Germany) Fon 49-(0)421 334708-2Fax
  49-(0)421 3398835Mail vbg_at_giss-ev.de
• Internet www.giss-ev.de