Researchers are conducting the UK’s first major scientific trials to establish whether giving homeless people cash is a more effective way of reducing poverty than traditional forms of help.
Poverty campaigners have long believed that cash transfers are the most cost-effective way of helping people, but most studies have examined schemes in developing countries.
The new study, funded by the government and carried out by King’s College London (KCL) and the homelessness charity Greater Change, will recruit 360 people in England and Wales. Half will continue to get help from frontline charities. The other half will get additional help from Greater Change, whose support workers will discuss their financial problems then pay for items such as rent deposits, outstanding debts, work equipment, white goods, furniture or new clothes. They do not make direct transfers to avoid benefits being stopped due to a cash influx.
If homelessness here is defined as rough sleeping then I don’t think this will work. For one set of rough sleepers – teeange runaways etc – there is already a large and very effective charity network. Which usually finds and sorts out within a couple of days of rough sleeping. Not entirely solves etc, but does distinctly help.
Then there’s the hard core of rough sleepers. And as we’ve discussed here many a time it’s not, in fact, either money or even housing which is the problem here. It’s the ability to stay in housing once its achieved – stay in the face of the significant addiction or mental health – or both – problems being suffered.
That is, there’s a portion – small, but it exists – of the population who cannot deal with this Care in the Community idea and who would be much better served by a looney bin. Which, of course, we don’t have any more, not for these halfway but not fully competent cases.
More money, aid into housing, it’s just not the solution for them. Of course, it is for the teen runaways. But they’re already being aided. So, no, I don’t think this is going to work. A claim might be made, after the experiment, that it has but I’ll still be v doubtful. Because – and here’s a prediction to be run against whatever result gets announced in time – they’ll count the teens as housed sa being success when they would already get there under the current dispensation. And I don;t think they’ll have – not long term – success with the dipsos that are the hard core of the problem.