Image: Istock
Ending homelessness: a crucial year ahead
The new national plan to end homelessness and rough sleeping is an important first step, but it fails to address some important issues for local authorities
CARE & SUPPORT
Liz Zacharias
Director, Campbell Tickell
Liz Zacharias
Director, Campbell Tickell
Issue 82 | February 2026
The Government’s recently published Plan to End Homelessness is a good start to tackling the issue in England. It’s not going to set the world on fire, but it does provide a direction of travel, clear objectives and desired outcomes.
But there are gaps, namely a failure to address the disparity between Local Housing Allowance (LHA) rates and actual rents and a lack of decisive action on the gap between what councils pay for temporary accommodation (TA) and the subsidy they receive – the biggest issue for local authorities (LAs), which are being virtually bankrupted by the cost of TA. Funds are tight and itʼs not always a good idea to throw money at a problem but these are two structural issues that should have been addressed in the Plan.
Focus on prevention
However the focus on prevention and the attempt to focus on the root causes of homelessness – poverty, lack of social capital, the withdrawal of care and health services for mental health and substance misuse after years of chronic underfunding and incoherent siloed strategies – to name but a few – is welcome, as is the move away from verification of rough sleepers before they can access support and housing.
Interestingly, the government has also released the ‘Ending Rough Sleeping Risk Assessment Tool (ERSRAT): A practical guide to identify those most at riskʼ. This assesses those most likely to sleep rough and is a tool we initially developed and piloted with eight LAs before the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government’s (MHCLG) wider national pilot and development of the tool. It will be interesting to see if the prediction of someone’s likelihood of rough sleeping is captured by the tool. This initial tool will no doubt eventually be enhanced by AI and if it could be enhanced to the point where it can support real prevention activities, that would be a good thing.
“Single homelessness has pushed up homelessness figures in every council we have worked with over the past few years.”
Single homelessness
We have just had further developments regarding the Supported Housing (Regulatory) Oversight Act 2023, with further guidance and new burdens funding issued this month. MHCLG have set out what they expect from local supported housing needs assessments and strategies, both of which should form a solid foundation for the licensing and quality standards to be introduced further down the line.
This year could therefore be critical for starting the process of tackling the single homelessness that has pushed up homelessness figures in every council we have worked with over the past few years.
As well as an assessment of the supported housing needs of individuals in each local authority there is now an opportunity to look again at the patterns of supported housing provision. Much of the provision now left after years of significant cuts and under-investment will not meet the needs of today’s (or tomorrow’s) single homeless people.
Patterns of provision
Our work across the country on homelessness and related issues has only strengthened my view that what we need is wholesale change to the pattern of provision: to move away from the concept of supported housing except for those with a long-term continuing or permanent need for housing with support.
For the most part, this will be 24-hour support, i.e. where staff are needed overnight to monitor or safeguard vulnerable individuals. There may be a need for some smaller shared supported for people who need or benefit from living with others in congregate arrangements and who want or need mutual support.
For everyone else – if there were the required number of housing units available – provision should be independent self-contained long-term housing, whether in flats in a block or pepper-potted around. The support needed can then be flexibly deployed as floating support. This should be multi-disciplinary and flexible – I would like to see Housing First incorporated within this model so support can flex from very high intensity right through to a periodic check-in with individuals who are largely independent – and everything in between.
“The most cost-effective approach would be to fund support that is completely tenure neutral, multi-disciplinary and flexible.”
A person-centred approach
This way of approaching the delivery of support can be very person-centred, wrapping-around the individual as much as they need it and can be adjusted as people stabilise or become more independent, helping to avoid cliff edges – particularly where levels of support need change.
As the Chief Secretary to the Treasury is beginning to look at working across Government to improve value for money, I would suggest they look at the need for housing-related support and how far it needs to be tied to bricks and mortar.
The most cost-effective approach would be to fund support that is completely tenure neutral, multi-disciplinary and flexible. If this support were freely available to anyone who needs it, the need would be for housing – rather than supported housing – except where people really need to be continually safeguarded or monitored
Supported housing and homelessness services at CT:
Our team understands the challenges and opportunities of delivering high-quality, person-centred services alongside growing demand, financial pressures and the diverse needs of different groups and communities.
- Explore our recent work and support here.
- Download a one-page overview: Delivering impact: aligning homelessness and supported housing services with new guidance
