Learning lessons from the response to COVID-19: safeguarding people experiencing homelessness, 25 January 2021

View the presentations and video from this virtual event.


Webinar recording

Webinar transcript

Moderator: Good morning, everyone. I'm Adi Cooper. I'm the-, I work for the Care and Health Improvement programme as a care and health improvement advisor here at the Local Government Association and I lead on safeguarding for the programme. Welcome to this session, learning lessons from the response to COVID-19, safeguarding people experiencing homelessness. We've got about 100 people who've joined the webinar and I think the numbers are still continuing to rise. Can I ask for you to use the Q&A function to submit any questions during this session? We are going to have three sets of speakers and then have a Q&A session at the end, but please put your questions in the Q&A as we go along, as my colleague, Michael Preston-Shoot will be monitoring it and be able to pull those questions through for the end, for the panel to address. So, we have three sets of speakers this morning. We have Susan Harrison, who's going to talk about social injustice on a grand scale, health,homelessness and housing supply. We've had-, got Atara Fridler and Laurence Coaker from Brent Skylight and Brent Council Housing Needs talking about homelessness response to COVID-19, and we've got Dr Stephen Parkin from King's College talking about a qualitative study of the experiences of people who were temporary accommodated during the Everyone In initiative in-, earlier on last year. But before I hand over to the speakers, who I'm really grateful to them for joining us this morning, I'm just going to say a bit about the background to these webinars and where we are in, in the programme on our workstream on safeguarding, adult safeguarding and homelessness.

 

So, this is the fourth of a series of eight virtual seminars that build on work that was previously done on adult safeguarding and homelessness during 2019 and 2020, so before the pandemic. We held four national workshops. These were organised nationally through the Care and Health Improvement programme, and they brought together people from across the country, across organisations and different sectors to listen to a whole range of speakers and talk about issues regarding safeguarding people who experience homelessness, particularly those who are, are at risk of abuse or neglect. The outcome from those four workshops was published as a briefing by Michael Preston-Shoot on adult safeguarding and homelessness, and it's on the Local Government Association website. It's been published by the LGA and ADASA, the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services. So, originally, before the pandemic, we had planned to disseminate that briefing and use it to support further discussion and debate at regional levels but COVID changed all that and our plans had to change. So, in discussion with members of an advisory group which we'd set up really early on in the process, to talk about how best to take this word forward, and they had helped us plan the four regional workshops we undertook.

 

The advisor group discussed what might be the best way of managing and taking this work forward during this COVID pandemic, and what was helpful, it was seen, was to organise this series of sessions based on themes, so they're based on a range of different themes regarding homelessness and adult safeguarding. But the objectives of all the eight workshops are the same, they're to share information, particularly regarding positive practice in this area of work, to provide an opportunity to understand how safeguarding people who've experienced homelessness has changed in this last year due to COVID and responses like Everyone In, which we're going to talk about today. But also to provide input for a further briefing, which we will be hopefully publishing later on this year, which will bring together, as it were, an update and new information in this, I'd say, emerging area of safeguarding practice. So, I'll just reiterate, please can you use the Q&A function to put your questions. The slides are going to be available on the LGA website afterwards, so the slides will be available from colleagues who present today, and we will have a session at the end. I'd also like to remind you, we've got a break planned for about 10:55 for ten minutes, a bit of a comfort break after the first two sets of speakers, and then we'll come back for the third speaker. So, without any further ado, Susan, I'll hand over to you for the first presentation. Thank you, everybody.

 

F: Thank you, Adi, I'm just going to put my slides up, that will just take me 30 seconds or so. So, can I just get confirmation from somebody that they can see my slides? Great, excellent. So, thank you so much for, for this opportunity. First of all, let me just introduce myself. So, I'm Susan Harrison. I'm working as the Deputy Director in the NHS in London for a function that has been overseeing the health response to the Everyone In programme. So, we're in this command and control structure and we're called a response sell but basically, we're a small team of people responding to the health needs of people who sleep rough in London and who live in hostels and hotels. I wanted to, to start with, with a quote from a 2008 document, so not so recent now, where the World Health Organisation talking about the social determinants of health 'affirmed that social injustice was killing on a grand scale, with a toxic combination of poor social policies and programmes, unfair economic arrangements and bad politics', and those being responsible for health inequalities. So, that's twelve, thirteen years ago now, it's very much part of the work that Sir Michael Marmot has been very heavily involved in over a-, over a couple of decades. And early on in the COVID pandemic, it was said in the media, on social media, in conversations, that COVID-19 was a great leveller, that we were all in this together and we were all experiencing the consequences of COVID in a-, in a kind of equal way. Well, that has proved to not be the case.

 

Of course, we're all having to adjust our lives in, in quite extraordinary ways but some people have had a much more difficult time, and sadly, some people have died, many people have died in this country, 100,000, getting close to. And we know that people with a history of homelessness are much more likely to be experiencing very significant health issues at any time, and therefore are much more exposed to the consequences of COVID. Of course, they're not the only population, there are other populations that have been very significantly challenged by the experience of COVID. So, we know all the discourse that has taken place around people from black and ethnic minority communities, but also the issues of poverty and people in, in multi-generational households, in overcrowded housing, people with a, a range of health conditions and, and life conditions. So, I wanted to, kind of, start off my presentation today, just setting that context about justice an injustice and, and, and where we are. So, my presentation is just going to talk a little bit about three different interacting aspects of, of health and homelessness and housing supply, because our aim in, in addressing the health needs of people who are homeless is not to create healthy homeless people. That's not the outcome that we want. We don't want healthy homeless people, we want healthy people and we want people, as best we can, in-, with the resources that we have, to have safe and secure accommodation, and we know that that's a great challenge in, in our environment.

 

So, I am gonna be talking a bit about health, a bit about homelessness but also just referencing housing supply because that's such a significant issues, and particularly in our context in England at this time, an issue for people who are non-UK citizens and/or people with no recourse to public funds, where their entitlements are very, very limited. So, a little bit of a reminder then, when we're thinking about safeguarding, what are the interventions that we can offer that help people who are homeless to be safe or even a little bit safer or quite a lot safer? And of course the-, one of the most important interventions that we can offer, if we have the resources to do it as a society, is safe and secure housing but that sits alongside the need for income, whether it's through benefits or employment, because housing costs and, and therefore has to be funded in, in some way. And, and our expectation in this country is that people fund their own housing, by and large. Another way in which we can support people who are homeless is by access to healthcare, and although primary care is accessible by anybody, regardless of housing or immigration status, the practicalities and realities, pre-COVID, were often challenging. And they're even more challenging at this time, when so much access is digitally-enabled, and for people who aren't able to access smart devices or, or the Internet, accessing healthcare through that portal presents some challenges.

 

And of course, as citizens and as people who live in communities, being part of networks of friends or family who support us are-, it's such an important resource, and you'd think all that would be theoretically easy from a policy point of view but of course our experience is that, that often, and for quite some time over successive governments, the ability to pull all that together has been constrained by, by policy. And in the context of this seminar, we're talking about adults. But of course there's a bigger and wider context of people with responsibilities for children and the long-term consequences who are living their lives in insecure accommodation, with families who are really struggling to, to support them in terms of their development and wellbeing, let alone their, their, their, their, their health, their food, their, their daily life. And so providing that level of safety and security of housing and income and healthcare sometimes seems hardly possible, and as I said, people whose immigration status makes them ineligible for some services have, have additional challenges. And at the early-, in the early stages of the pandemic, at a stroke, in the rough sleeping world, it looked as if homelessness was being eradicated, at least for a while. So, the Everyone In programme was, was very successful in enabling people to come indoors, when, when previously they hadn't been able to. And people on, on this call I'm sure will be aware of the-, of the significant number of hotels that were stood up.

 

I'm going to move to a slide now, and I just want to thank my colleagues from Haringey for this slide. It's a slide that, that Gill Taylor prepared for, for a previous presentation. I'm using it with, with her consent. So, so, I'm just going to go back 'cause this is an animated slide. There are different circumstances that come together, sadly, to impact on the experience of homelessness. There are individual circumstances in the lives of people. There are local systems and services and there are structural and social factors. So, just to fill in this slide a little bit, in terms of the individual circumstances, you have issues like people's health status, their family support, their past or current experience of trauma or violence, perhaps experience of bereavement, you know, especially so in these very difficult times, loss of employment, circumstances where people may have become evicted or may have a history of institutional care. All those things show up in the lives of, of individuals. And then we have local policy issues, which are to do with the way in which landlords are licensed, what's available in a locality, how policies work in terms of allocation, who's prioritised, who's not, what kind of hostels and hotels are, are available in localities. And of course the police are key partners in, in, in the approach to, to housing and homelessness. And then if we move out into a bigger arena, we can think about the policies in relation to welfare, how housing supply is enabled and funded, immigration policies, our history of austerity in this country and how social exclusion and inequality impact on people.

 

So, sadly, when you become homeless, any of those factors may be at play, which make it a very complicated environment to be engaged in addressing the needs of people who may not be safe. Just wanted to, to say a little bit now, moving on to a different topic, about the concept of multiple exclusion homelessness. So, if you think about my, my previous slide, you can see that there are many factors that influence people's lived experience but coming right down to the individual, when those factors coincide in their lived experience, their chances of finding solutions, of being able to be safer, are very heavily compromised. And if, if you're not familiar with this concept, it's a concept that, that people have done quite a lot of description and research on, and in the resources slides that i will have at the end of my presentation, that you'll get with the-, with the slides, you can-, you can read more. There's some very helpful web-based toolkits that, that can support you and the people that you're working with, to understand the impact that these kind of circumstances might have on people's life chances and their ability to find their way through into, into different and better resources. Lots of-, lots of data here, this is-, this is quite a busy slide but it's just a very quick reference, and, and again, thank you to a colleague who's allowed me to, to use this slide. She's a, a GP, Dr Caroline Shulman, who works with homeless people, that, that evidences and demonstrates the interrelationship between substance misuse, mental health needs and physical health needs, that often are experienced by people who find themselves homeless and in long-term homelessness.

 

So, we need to be really aware of the operational consequences of organising services that are able to respond to that level of need, very high levels of, of physical health needs, very high level of mental health needs and substance misuse needs in the homelessness population. And it's important, when we're thinking about health services, that we understand the, the way in which services need to be designed to respond to that. And during the pandemic in, in London, NHS services and local authority public health services have been trying, as best they can, to organise themselves in a way that supports people to, to address all these aspects of their-, of their health needs. Just some London facts and figures, for those of you who are in London, you might be well-, you might be very familiar with them. They're, they're very common characteristics in, in other parts of the country. So, very sadly, and this is well-documented and researched and data available on the ONS websites, people with a history of homelessness generally die in their mid-40s, so that's a good 30 to 40 years earlier than I might expect to live. In London, there are many nationalities in the-, in the single homelessness population, over 130 last year, and pre-pandemic, there was just shy of 11,000 people living on the street in, in, in London, not at any one time but throughout the course of the year. And for every person who's homeless, there are many more hidden homeless, people who are in other sorts of precarious arrangements, not so visible but nevertheless, in great housing need, and in London, the number of rough sleepers has risen very significantly over ten years.

 

And all the research data indicates that people who are homeless use emergency services, like A&E, at a much greater frequency than, than we might, and there's lots of data, if people aren't familiar with the monitor that's produced by Crisis and research colleagues in Edinburgh, there's, there's a link on the slides. And then thank you to Michael Preston-Shoot for a graphic that just shows the interdependency between different bits of the system when we're thinking about safeguarding individuals. So, again, the, the, the reference for this is, is at the end of my slides, but it does, i think, help me when I'm feeling overwhelmed by the complexity of, of what we're trying to do, and as front-line practitioners, I'm sure many people on this call will feel that as well. We're seeking to intervene across a whole range of different systems, and we have to be sure that our governance is supporting us to do that, because the context that brings people into homelessness is very complicated. Now, very briefly, I want to ask you to think about a particular case-study, and I'm-, I am going to ask you to put some issues that come to mind in the Q&A. I'll do that in a minute, but first of all, I want to tell you about, about an individual, an individual who-, whose life I got to know in, in a great deal of, of depth and from whom I learnt very much.

 

Mr A, and that was the pseudonym, was, was born in Pakistan, lived in Afghanistan and came to the UK in the 1970s and he worked in construction. Much later on, he was evicted from his housing association flat for rent arrears. It actually wasn't very much, it was about £1,500 worth of rent arrears. So, in the grand scheme of things, that's not a humongous amount of money but nevertheless, his housing association took action and a court order was, was issued. And he was-, he then took up rough sleeping in an alleyway in, in south London. He was known and diagnosed as having schizophrenia and he had both the, kind of, florid symptoms of schizophrenia but also what's called negative symptoms, so he was quite withdrawn. And he had been discharged by a mental health trust in, in London because he was said to have not engaged with their services, and he drank alcohol during the day, people, kind of, thought it wasn't so great, the amount of alcohol that he was drinking, and he wasn't registered with a GP. Now, what I would like, if you're willing, is just to pop into the Q&A what kinds of risk issues you think he may well have been experiencing, so if you could just do that for two or three minutes and, and, Michael, if you wouldn't mind just shouting out some of them once, once they're up.

 

M: Assault and violence, Susan.

 

F: Right.

 

M: Is the first contribution.

 

F: I presume-, I'm, I'm guessing he could be the victim of assault and violence but perhaps he might be the perpetrator of assault and violence?

 

M: Yes, it, it didn't say but could be both, of course. No access to primary healthcare, not registered with a GP, so who does he turn to for ailments? Isolation, depression, mental health not being monitored, partly because he doesn't have input from a GP. Self-harm, suicide, self-neglect, neglect of physical and mental health needs, malnutrition. Misunderstanding of mental health and alcohol use. Language is a barrier. Another reference to self-neglect. Possibility of harm to others. Again, neglect of nutritional needs. Non-engagement with services, making it difficult to help him. Undiagnosed long-term conditions. Lower-, lowering self-esteem over time. Mental health issues not being addressed, physical health issues not being addressed. Reference to his ethnicity. Possibility of racism and racist attacks.

 

F: Great, I'll-, let's-, that, that-, that's a great list of things. So, thank you for those who, who put some comments there, and thank you, Michael, for, for helping with that. I'm just gonna say a couple of things and then I'm going to talk about what happened to Mr A. So, interestingly, Mr A was very well looked after in this extraordinary circumstance. I'm saying very well, that's a-, that's a bit of an exaggeration. Mr A was, was engaged well by local shopkeepers. Local shopkeepers were able to speak with him. They understood his faith needs and they provided him with food that was appropriate to his, his cultural and faith needs, and they were humane in their contact with him. They didn't engage statutory services in that but they gave him a bit of-, a bit of support and, and nutrition, and watched out for him. Outreach services were attempting to outreach him, and then-, and this is a little bit of a, a trigger warning, sadly, he died. So, he was-, he was found dead after some very, very severe snowy, cold weather. He was sadly-, had a, a, a postmortem examination by, by the coroner's office, and he died of untreated hypertension. He didn't die of hyperthermia. He didn't die of many things that you might imagine. He died because nobody had ever measured his blood pressure, that we could find in his records, and treated it, a completely treatable condition.

 

Now, of course, incredibly complicated because he also had a diagnosis of schizophrenia. So, complying with blood-pressure medication might well have also required being active and participating in care of his mental illness. He died a little bit before his 64th birthday, so older than many rough sleepers but still younger, perhaps, than, than his family might have hoped for. And the circumstances of his death were reviewed, it was just before the Care Act, so it was a different-, a different form of review. So, on, on that-, on that sad note, I want to finish my, my, my presentation now, and perhaps just remind you of, of my starting point. We're, we're in a world where coordinating housing and health for people is very, very challenging, and it's especially challenging during the COVID pandemic, but sometimes, sadly, the circumstances that take people from us are, are circumstances that could so easily have been fixed by an intervention way upstream. And helping people to be safer involves housing, income, health and family connections, and that's our endeavour and that's our challenge. Thank you.

 

Moderator: Thank you so much, Susan. So, that's really insightful and very sobering presentation, and I would like people to remember that we've got time at the end for questions, to come back to, to any issues that Susan has raised that people want to discuss further, we can come to-, back to at the end of this morning's session. So, in the meantime, without any further ado, can I move on to our next speakers, Atara and Laurence? If you could put your slides up and take us through for the next twenty minutes or so, thank you.

 

F: Good morning, everyone, and thanks a lot for the invite to join you this morning, and thanks, Susan, for a really interesting presenting. My name is Atara Fridler. I'm the Director for Crisis in Brent, and obviously, in our services in Brent, we support over 1,000 people, by providing direct services, but also another aspect for work is Brent is to work with others to improve homelessness system in the local here. And I'm here this morning with Laurence Coaker, who is the Head of Housing Needs in Brent Council, who is going to introduce himself a bit more when he-, it comes to his presentation. But Laurence and I has been working for many years now, and more specifically, in the last couple of years, we collaborated around the Homelessness Forum, which I'll touch on very shortly. As we know, partnership is one of the six principle of safeguarding and we've been asked today to talk about multi-agency work in Brent. It's really about that. It's about creating local solution through services working together within a community. And, in our presentation, we're going to provide you a bit of a context, background to our work in Brent, how we work together, and then we going to take you through our response to the first lockdown or when the pandemic started, in terms of what activity, what we did, but also give you a good insight of the outcomes for individual. And lastly, we're going to finish with how things now, give you a bit of update on where we are.

 

So, I'll start with a bit of background and a context to our joint working in Brent. So, I think, really, the core of that is our work around the Brent Homelessness Forum. We established that in late 2018, so it's really going strong now, for just over two years. We've got over 100 members in the forum, represented a range of organisations, from the statutory sector, being it health, the local authority, from various departments within the local authorities, to the Jobcentre. Also, very importantly, the voluntary and community sector, from a, a commission provider, such as St Mungo's and Look Ahead locally, to very small community group-, community centres such as Rumi's Cave, which is a very small organisation, providing food-bank and a bit IT access on a-, an estate, and as well, the faith communities. So, we've got very strong link with the multi-faith forum in Brent. So, a very range of organisation joining the Homelessness Forum. And, in essence, the Homelessness Forum is around improving the way that we share information, how we are exchanging and sharing learning, that we're creating much stronger partnership and cooperation, how we're coordinating our activity, how we review and respond to local strategies and policies, and how we scrutinise that once they are in place. But, very importantly, it's around developing and promoting a joint solution.

 

And in the first two years of the forum, one of the things that we did was to focus on the complex needs cohort in Brent, so it's homeless people, that I'm sure many of you are familiar with, that very often fall in between services, be it health, housing, police and so on. And, as homeless providers, we know that a lot of them do not get great outcomes. It’s really hard to resolve their homelessness. So, we came together, and just to say, the Homelessness Forum is by the-, by voluntary sectors. So, I'm the chair of it but when we are setting task and finishing group, where we try to create solution, we invite other voluntary organisation, local leaders, to head that. So, on this specific task and finishing group, it was headed by the outreach manager from St Mungo's but it was very much an activity supported and co-hosted by the council. So, it's a real co-production across sectors. So, this specific complex need work actually ended up with us developing a solution that Brent implemented, and it was around setting up-, initially, it was to set up a panel that looks to resolve individual cases, where multi-agency attempts are tried but encounter some barrier and cannot progress. So, that's a little bit of a context, how we work, and we are meeting on a six-weekly basis or eight-weekly basis, and a very active forum. So, let's move to what happened when the-, end of March, when the pandemic hit us and how we came together.

 

So, in a way, it was really easy for us to come together 'cause we had the connection, so very much from the start, the Homeless Forum as a whole, which is big group, we met-, to start with, we met every two weeks, just to share information, to make sure everyone knows where to go, what to do, and later on, as things calmed down a little bit, we met on a monthly basis. But we also brought together a very small group that-, almost like a task and finishing group in a way, a specific working group around COVID-19 and homelessness, which is chaired by Laurence, and is supported by the voluntary sector. So, we're doing quite a lot around the administration and coordination of that and sharing of the information. We put information sharing agreements quickly in place, so that was signed up by the key organisation that form part of this working grouping group, so we can address issues around-, share intelligence, share cases of individual we're concerned about very quickly. And we came together to support, initially, the Everyone In response, and you can say we co-produced the respond locally. It was very much a joint effort between the, the sector, being it the voluntary sector that led on the, kind of, initial drafting of that, the council then took it through their mechanism, finalised it with input from partners from health, the Jobcentre and so on. An important part of it all, as things were changing in a very fast way to begin was-, begin with, was to ensure that everyone know what's happening.

 

So, as someone that is chairing the Homelessness Forum, and Crisis very much support that, we made sure that we are sending regular communication. It was initially just on a weekly basis, bi-weekly and then monthly. So, when we need to share information, we send it to our quite wide list of members. The-, have you-, if, if you recall, and you will see here, through the Everyone In response, was people were taken from the street and were house-, accommodated in hotel accommodation, and one of our initial concern was around their access to food, and, 'How do we make sure that people in these various accommodation is able to self-isolate if they need to, they can keep this social distancing?' And a lot of this hotel accommodation, as well a commission hostel, there is shared facilities and there is reduced opportunity to actually cook within your own room or accommodation. So, one of our first operation was actually to map up how people can access food. If they need to self-isolate, how can they access it? But how can we reduce access to a shared facility? We did a mapping exercise. We link with a, a food-bank and with various food-banks, and we did this massive food delivery operation to make sure people can maintain social distancing when required. One of the things that came in the first lockdown was the council has set up the smart team, and the smart team is a, kind of, the next step on this complex needs task and finishing recommendation that I mentioned previously.

 

So, the, the recommendation of the task and finishing group, when we-, the Homelessness Forum held, it was really around setting up complex need panel, where there is the decision-making, resolving individual cases, but the knowledge that came through was these individual cases that came-, that came to the panel actually meant that Brent decided it's-, they need to set up the smart team, which is a supportive, multi-disciplinary response team, headed by a social worker. You've got mental health specialists working within that, a housing officer, a drug and alcohol specialist, an occupational therapist, so really a good team that heading on a very-, leading on very complex cases which they are supporting. So, that came into place at the beginning of the lockdown. The other thing that we were able to do, again in terms of sharing information and making sure-, making sure that people know what to do, is that we ran homelessness, homelessness awareness training to the new mutual aids it forms, to the CCG staff in all the locality in Brent, to the various faith community, so the multi, multi-faith forum and so on. So, overall, I think we trained over 200 people and it's really just to let them know what to do if they're coming across a homeless person in need, and how to help them. And lastly, something that we brought into attention is around the domestic abuse.

 

So, there was-, I'm sure, as other providers, you-, we noticed a spike in domestic abuse cases that came through us at the beginning of the lockdown, and we raised it, we were able to raise it with Brent and they did a, a work across sector, so it wasn't necessarily just for the homelessness sector, very sadly, something that we brought into attention. And I'll pass over to Laurence to talk through around the Everyone In response in more details.

 

M: Okay, thanks, thanks, Atara, and good morning, everybody. So, I'll just explain, first of all, the, the structure at the council. We have a, a dedicated team that deals with single homelessness, which began with the inception of the Homelessness Reduction Act, because we knew there'd be an increase in single homelessness on the back of that new piece of legislation. So, we already had a dedicated team dealing with single homelessness. However, because of the, the, the lockdown in March, we had to put more resource into that team because of the, the significant impact. So, you can see there, on the slide, we, we began really around 23rd March, and that was in response to the government's call to decant shelters, rough-sleeping shelters, which were just coming to an end, the winter ones, when people weren't able to self-isolate, and also to get people in off the streets. We, we really ceased the Everyone In around 6th July, and that was when the government released new guidance, the M guidance was amended around, you know, the priority need test and, and people being clinically vulnerable. So, during that period, there were-, there were a total of 423 single homeless people who, who approached the council, and they-, well, they were mainly people who were sofa-surfing, making temporary arrangements with friends or, or family, and because of the, the, the lockdown and the need to self-isolate, those very temporary arrangements came to an end. And so they, they needed to be accommodated.

 

The majority did approach the council directly, so 219, but we also got an awful lot of referrals through from the outreach team. So, these were people who, who were either quite entrenched rough sleepers on the streets or new to the streets, new flow because of these temporary, temporary arrangements had come to an end. And, and so that forced them out onto the streets but we also got referrals through from other agencies, including Crisis, of, of other single homeless people. So, we accommodated the vast majority of them. There were only 76 who, who were not accommodated by the council, and the majority of those were picked up by other agencies. So, I think you're probably all aware that the GLA also had a significant response to Everyone In, or, or other councils or, or people made their own arrangements. So, in, in the end, there was just nineteen people who were either not actually homeless or, or they withdrew their application or, or they refused the council's offer of emergency accommodation. So, as, as it says there, the majority, 347, were placed into emergency accommodation. So, just move on a slide please. Thank you, seamless. So, one, one of the big challenges is this issue about eligibility and this is one of the tests in the homelessness legislation, and this is all to do with immigration status.

 

So, you can see there that the majority of people who, who were accommodated were eligible, and so there were no issues there but then quite a large cohort were EEA citizens, who were not eligible because they didn't have settled status in the UK. They weren't exercising their treaty rights. And then a, a further sixteen people, who were from outside of the European Union, and, and again, they were not eligible for public funds, to access public funds. However, everyone was accommodated, even though they didn't meet the eligibility test within homelessness legislation, the council did accommodate everybody. So, just move on again. So, the, the non-eligible cohort, so, there were-, there were 46 people from the EEA, what, what we've been doing, we, we secured rooms in a-, one of the larger hotels in Wembley, which is obviously not doing any business with tourism anymore, so that was available and we block-booked rooms. So, so, we block-booked 60 rooms in this-, in this hotel and we were able to provide food, because obviously these people are not entitled to claim any benefit at all, and so can't feed themselves, and so food is provided for, for this cohort. And officers are working with them to either claim settled status in the UK or, or pre-settled status, all, all depends on, on whether or not they've been in the UK for more than-, more than five years. And we've had some really positive outcomes.

 

So, this is a snapshot, obviously it's ongoing work, these people are still in the-, in the hotel but at the time of this slide, I know it's moved since, since now, but nineteen people have already-, have already secured that status, either pre-settled or, or settled status, and officers are now working with them to move, move them on into more settled accommodation. So, that, that's very positive. We've also submitted an application to the settled-, the settled-, European Settled Status Scheme for a further nineteen, and the majority of those will get settled status because they've been in the country for more than five years. So, again, we're very positive, we're very hopeful that those, those people will also be able to get their status and we will be able to support them to move on into more settled accommodation. The sixteen from outside the EEA are a lot more complicated. Six have actually abandoned the emergency accommodation and we don't know where they've gone. They're, they're, they're not on our streets. They, they could possibly have gone back to the sofa-surfing arrangement they were making prior to the lockdown or they may have moved on to another borough but we, we, we don't know where, where they've gone. We have had some positive outcomes.

 

We, we have access to a law centre and we've, we've provided free legal advice to all of the EEA nationals and the people from outside the EEA, to see if there is any chance of, of securing or, or, or, or regularising the immigration status in the UK, and we've had two successes so far, where people have been granted indefinite leave to remain in the UK. So, that's very positive, and again, those people will be assisted to move on to more settled accommodation. Sorry, next slide. The eligible cohort, we-, the group that Atara referred to earlier, worked very well together and, and between us, we, we had a strategy and we basically identified four, four routes out of the emergency accommodation. So, people with no or, or low support needs were fairly straightforward, in as much as we could access private rented sector accommodation. So, the council would pay the incentive payments to a private sector landlord and set up the Universal Credit claim, to claim the, the housing element, so that people could, could move on into the private rented sector. We also did that for people with, with low to medium support needs but they-, because of those slightly higher support needs, we have a floating support scheme, run by Thames Reach, not, not (inaudible 48.43), sort of two hours a week, someone will, will come by and just check in with the tenant to make sure that there's no issues, that they're able to sustain their tenancy, benefits are up and running. And there's no-, there's no issues, which may lead to the tenancy failing and of course you just have the revolving door then of homelessness.

 

The third pathway was for people with, with medium to high support needs, and for this cohort, we were able to access our accommodation-based supported housing in the borough. We were also able to increase our, our supply of that accommodation. The, the government did have a money available to bid for. There was the no-, no second-, sorry, Next Step Accommodation programme was, was a pot of money that was available and the-, and also the GLA have a-, another pot of money, the Rough Sleeper Accommodation programme, and we bid for, for funding in both of those grants, and, and were successful in securing money, which meant that we could increase our capacity. So, that was for the medium support and also high support. The council already had a Housing First scheme, which had been running for a few years, financed through the Rough Sleeper initiative grant, where the council are supplying our own studio accommodation, council-owned accommodation, and St Mungo's are providing very, very intense support for, for the more entrenched rough sleepers. We initially had six units. We increased that to twelve in the RSI 3 grant last year, and we now increased that to eighteen units. So, we've increased the support and we're just identifying the additional six properties, to make a total of eighteen Housing First units that will be available to the more entrenched, high, high complex, highly-, high support needs rough sleepers.

 

So, just moving on. So, this, this is the outcomes to-date of the-, of the eligible cohort, and you can see the, the-, yeah, the top-, the top four rows account for nearly, nearly 180 people and, and that-, they're all very, very positive. You can see the majority of people were able just to move into the private rented sector with no support at all, and that just shows that the-, a lot of people who were sofa-surfing, that hadn't actually gone out onto the streets yet. Which I think is, is telling, because they, they-, I think once you are out in the streets, then obviously your health and, and mental health and physical health would all deteriorate, leading to the need for support but because we were able to get people into emergency accommodation-,

 

Moderator: Oh, we've lost you there. We've lost your sound.

 

M: Are you back now?

 

Moderator: We are back now, thank you very much.

 

M: Okay, sorry.

 

Moderator: You've got a few more minutes, thanks.

 

M: Okay. So, moving on then, you can see that some people went into the supportive housing, so they were-, obviously that was the people who were more likely to already have been out on the streets, and, and so they needed that support. Further down the table there's more negative outcomes, where people either abandoned or declined the offer of accommodation that was made or, unfortunately, ended up going back to prison or, or, sorry, going into prison or, or back to hospital etc. But by, by, by far, the, the majority of people did have a positive outcome. So, just moving on. So, I think this is the last slide, Atara?

 

F: Yeah, thank you, and I'll, I'll finish quickly. That-, this is just to give you a bit of where we're at the moment. So, at, at the moment, the working group is really focussing on testing and vaccination, working very closely with our partner in the CCG and the primary care trust, to map how that would happen in Brent. And the good news is that some of the front-line homelessness sector staff has been receiving their vaccination, so we're moving quite quickly with that, and the-, I believe, very shortly, we'll start with the homeless population as well. We are focussing on the SWEP and the night shelter provision, that is very imminent, with a, a-. Obviously it's happening now, with the bad weather, doing some work around eviction, 'cause we know it's coming. So, in partnership with Citizen Advising brand, and, and yeah, and the other, other pieces of work that we are linking with, but I'll, I'll stop here. I hope it gave you a good sense of how things looked on the ground and, kind of, the depth of our partnership working in Brent.

 

Moderator: Well, thank you very much, and I'll remind colleagues on the call that any questions for Atara and Laurence, put it in the Q&A and Michael will bring them together for the panel discussion after our final speaker. So, we're just going to break now for ten minutes. Don't log out, stay logged in, go and get a cup of tea, have a comfort break, and we'll come back at 11:05 for the next speaker. So, see you in ten minutes, bye. So, we're now moving on to questions for the panel, and I'm going to take chair's prerogative and ask a couple myself first. So, I think my first question kind of builds on some of the feedback from-, that Stephen has just recently identified, which is, I suppose, the difference in approaches to homelessness and people experiencing homelessness, from the first lockdown through to the second and where we are now, in the third. And, in particular, in terms of any safeguarding issues that have arisen. I don't know, if people could just-, if colleagues on the panel can just indicate that they would be able to come in and respond to that. Would any of you like to hazard a guess as to the differences over the different lockdown periods in approach? Thanks, Stephen, do join.

 

M: Okay, I think I've understood the question as what, what safeguarding issues would be different in the second or third lockdown. And again, I can only speak from the, the perspective of those that we've interviewed and how their experiences is, is, going forward in terms of that. So, for a significant number of those that we interviewed, some are still in-, when we last heard from them, were still in some form of accommodation, and that accommodation, as I mentioned earlier, varies in quality and standard. It's reducing opportunities for social distancing, a return, in some cases, to substance use. So, the, the changes from the second lockdown, which was, let me get this right, was December?

 

Moderator: November, yeah.

 

M: November to December, that-, what I've just said certainly qualifies for that period. We know less about the most recent lockdown but if they're still in that same accommodation, we can only assume, and still continuing that way.

 

Moderator: Thank you, Stephen. Does anyone else want to respond to that question? Atara, thank you.

 

F: I think-, I think I understood the question. I think it's-, it's obviously-, we didn't have the repeat of the first lockdown in terms of this commitment to Everyone In, which was disappointing 'cause it is becoming more harder to house people, not specifically in Brent, but in other boroughs that we're trying to advocate for members. So, that's, that's been disappointing. I think the positive thing that did happen in the first lockdown, it's not just the fact that we housed people, it's that people also came into our radar. So, they were able to connect with services and all this kind of safeguarding approach was-, is-, was much more robust. So, just the fact that we've got so many Housing First provision now in, in Brent, it's just, kind of, highlighted we've been able to connect with the really high-need individual that we weren't able to before. And I think that's very disappointed, about this, kind of, the second and the third lockdown 'cause sometimes people not necessarily will be rough sleeping. You know, they might be, kind of, having a really peculiar arrangement of having to ask people, with favour, with a really uncomfortable situation.

 

Moderator: It makes them vulnerable in terms of safeguarding risks.

 

F: Exactly, so-, which is, yeah, quite limited in the, kind of, second and third lockdown now.

 

Moderator: Susan, do you want to add anything?

 

F: So, I, momentarily, lost connection, so I'm, I'm back again. What was the question?

 

Moderator: Well, it was really about any differences around the first, second and third lockdowns, and particularly around safeguarding risks, I suppose.

 

F: Yes, I mean, I think it's very much what people said, that, that there's ambivalence in, in government about the level of funding that it is cascading to both local authorities and, and the GLA, to enable Everyone In. So, the routes into hotel accommodation now are, are more challenging, and so that places more people at risk. And, and at this moment in time, there isn't a-, an onward, an easy onward solution for people whose immigration status is complicated.

 

Moderator: So, I wonder whether also how that impact in terms of the weather and the-, you know, as an ex-director of housing in terms of, the temperature's dropping zero degrees, it always worries me. That, you know, in the first lockdown, we were moving towards the summer but now we're right in the middle of winter, and the-, therefore, particularly for people who are rough sleeping, it's a very-, it's a very dangerous time to be out on the streets, regardless.

 

F: Indeed, and the-, and, you know, there's a severe weather emergency protocol that's activated but it comes in and out and in and out, according to the temperature, so that's also very-, it doesn't provide continuity.

 

Moderator: And it seemed to me, from the presentations, that one of the benefits of the approach the first time was having the time to provide connections to-, whether it was health-, healthcare, mental health, physical healthcare, mental healthcare, or whether it was to-, access to the law centre, for example, to provide some of that longer-term support work was really important in terms of some continuity. And the changes and the fluctuations make all of that far more difficult. So, thank you for that. That was my questions. I'll hand over to Michael to feed through the questions from participants that they've been posting on the Q&A. So, over to you, Michael.

 

Moderator: Thanks, thanks Ady. There have been a few comments and, and questions in the chat. I hope I've picked-, I hope I've picked them out and I'll monitor whilst people are answering, but to Susan first, there was a question, Susan, about in relation to the Mister A case or the writing out of it about how do you get people to engage when they may be, for some reason, hesitant to do so with healthcare and particularly with GP surgeries and whether there's a role for an outreach nurse in that context? And an observation that there's variable outreach health provision for people with physical ill-health and, and mental distress, and a question about whether you thought that we should be commissioning a panel London region homeless health team?

 

F: So, a whole range of questions there. So, in, in, in the first instance, I think any of us who work in, in services that support rough sleepers are hopefully being trained or supported through our supervision arrangements in psychologically informed practice. So, thinking about the trauma that people may have experienced in their lives and what we may need to do to be very sensitive and appropriate to, to support people in the circumstances in which they find themselves. Peer advocacy is a very useful resource in, in, in terms of coming alongside folk who are street homeless. If you have a history yourself of having lived on the street then there might be ways of which you can engage in a way that a professional may not. The question about, you know, what, what is available, what is regional, what is sub-regional, what is local authority, what is community-based? Is such a, is such a tricky one. There are some pan-London (ph 01.02.56) service, so for example the Find and Treat team that do testing and COVID surveillance at the moment are a pan-London service but actually we also want people to be supported in communities. We want them to be able to engage back in with, with the networks that they were formally part of so it is a, it is a dilemma. All the integrated care systems in, in London, the five of them, have homeless health leads and so it's a mixture, I think, of, of what you do on a local basis and what you do on a, on a regional basis. Again, one of the dilemmas in all of this is the level of funding that is available and that makes it very tricky, when the funding is not there for the resource-, you know, the resources aren't there. So, I hope that picks up some of the things that, that, that were in the questions.

 

Moderator: Okay, thanks, thanks Susan. I'll share the questions out as best I can equally, as it were. So, for Atara and, and for Laurence, I've, I've picked up three comments. The first about the, the homelessness forum which in one webinar attendee's experience elsewhere has tended to be reactive rather than proactive and whether you've got any wisdom about how to make forums more proactive on the basis of your experience in Brent? That was one question. And the second question was about how, in Brent, vaccination of homeless people is, is, is being approached and whether you've got any observations on that. And then lastly, the third question was around multi-agency working which, based on your presentation in Brent, has obviously been working well in a crisis. And the question was about how does one maintain multi-agency working, as it were, in more normal times rather than in the midst of a crisis? So, I don't know whether you can comment on any of those three contributions from-,

 

F: Michael, may I intervene just very briefly? I'm happy to say something about vaccination across London a bit later. Yes.

 

Moderator: Okay, alright, thank you Susan. So, Atara and, and Laurence?

 

F: I'm happy to start and, Laurence, maybe you can add to it. So, I think for, for my (mw 01.05.33), we'll give you a different perspective obviously because I'm the voluntary sector, Laurence is a statutory from the council. So, it will be interesting to see actually how we will approach that but for me in terms of how to ensure that the homeless forum is proactive rather than reactive is really how do you approach things? So, first it's really around how do we do it together? So, I would say that it's something that we're really co-producing with Laurence or with the council but it's very much led by us. So, it's led by the voluntary sector but it's hosted and co-produced with Brent. So, we meet quite-, we meet on a yearly basis, well it's two years but we-, even just the answer of that was kind of to vision it together, what would-, might it be, to think about the approach, to set priority for the year ahead. We're doing it every beginning of the year, we're setting priority for the year ahead that is-, and the priority is really curated through discussion with member of the forum. That they bring their experience of them, themselves as front-line staff but also of their service user that they are supporting. So, it's, it's-, really we've got this almost like a strategic approach of how do we-, making sure this space is really effective and it's governed effective and it's-, we're accountable for the priority that we set up through the year, so to make sure that we are proactive or planning ahead as well as picking up things as they're coming along, like the COVID-19, but also like the way that we're responding to what we saw is a gap in service to people that are a complex need. And how to ensure the sustain, I think, I think we proved it.

 

We did it before the COVID-19 started and we're going to continue doing it but it does require some resources, it does require some time coordinating and really paying attention on how we communicate it and making sure that the space is inclusive. And I can say something on vaccination but maybe I'll pass to Laurence first and, and then if need be I can say something.

 

M: Sure. Thanks Atara. Yes, I think the only thing I, I would add about the proactive approach of the, the homeless' forum is that we, we have the, the council strategy on homelessness and rough sleeping, five year strategy. I think that's, that's a good place to start. I don't know who asked the question but if you, if you find the local authority's strategy and then maybe use that to drive the, the agenda at the forum, because there will be priorities set out in that strategy. And it's very much, like Atara said, it's, it's, it's lead by the voluntary sector and it's an opportunity to almost hold the council to account about, you know, we've identified the priorities, which of course we did in consultation with the forum as well, they were involved in, in setting those priorities and then it's how do we deliver them? And obviously it needs to be dynamic and I think these last twelve months is a really good example of how things can change very quickly and you have to therefore adapt your, your strategies accordingly. But the partnership working in a crisis, yes, it was, it was fantastic but then, as Atara said, we've, we've always worked in collaboration and I think another big driver for that was the homelessness reduction act. The, the section of that act really, really was a game changer in Brent and, I've got to be honest, I don’t think our, our services to single homeless people were particularly good pre, pre that legislation, however we've now got these dedicated teams set up and one of them is a, a prevention service which is actually run by Crisis. So, it's a commissioned serviced by, by the local authority and we, we employ officers from Crisis to actually work with single homeless people around their personal housing plan, around the prevention and relief duties and that's been very successful.

 

It's a model called SHPS, Single Homelessness Prevention Service, and it's now been rolled out across London. So, other, other London boroughs are also using that, so we've always worked, we've always worked well together and it's not just in a crisis. The third one on vaccination, in Brent we recognised that, you know, these large cohorts that we've still got in our hotels, mainly, mainly the non-eligible people but also recently with SWEP being activated, we haven't been able to rely on the, the hostels that we would normally use for SWEP because of the pandemic and not being able to self-isolate. So, we're, we're block-booking hotel rooms again for, for SWEP and that, of course, means we've got large groups of people in, in fairly small properties. You know, 30 or 40 or 50 people in, in hotels so, A, we're very much trying to get the lateral flow testing as a, as a-, ingrained so that people can go down to their local centre and have a weekly test but we've also been working with the CCG in Brent and we've, we've made sure that this cohort are being prioritised for the vaccination, and we've been successful in getting them into tier three for the priority to get them vaccinated. So, hopefully in the next month or so everyone in our hotels will, will have received the vaccination.

 

Moderator: Thank you Laurence. Atara, anything to add before I pass to Susan for a comment on vaccination?

 

F: Yes, I'll just say that there is, there is another work that we are doing but it's kind of still evolving. It's kind of thinking actually how to support all this vaccination effort in terms of recruiting volunteers to be a bit almost like health champions, promoting but also supporting and, and people into the vaccination centres.

 

Moderator: Okay, thank you. Susan?

 

F: So, just very briefly in case people haven't picked it up, a ministerial letter went out to all local authorities, advising them that housing, front-line housing support workers are in eligibility category two. So, they are to be treated the same as health staff and social care staff. So, if you're a housing support working, working with clients or working on the front-line you're eligible for a COVID vaccination. Local authorities have been advised of that. The joint committee for vaccination and immunisation, so a national committee, has not prioritised rough sleeper and there's a great deal of lobbying going on but the lobbying is across all client groups. So, people with learning disabilities are not prioritised either, as a for example. So, the priorities come from your co-morbidities, not from, you know, the other category that you might have. So, it's really, really encouraging to hear that Brent are, are managing to do what they're doing. We're, we're hoping to get a, a, some more national steer that will lift rough sleepers in particular up the priority list, so we're working very hard on that.

 

Moderator: Okay, thank you Susan. And then Steven, two questions for you. One was about how the 35 people in your sample were selected and the second was whether you, your study has produced any recommendations for going forward in the next twelve months?

 

M: Thanks Michael. Hopefully you can hear me okay.

 

Moderator: At the moment, yes.

 

M: Okay, brilliant. Okay, so in terms of selection, the study was an opt-in study so it was a case of we delivered information leaflets to the various hotels. We were given instructions on how to deliver those leaflets at the hotel and it was then up to the residents to then contact me to take part in a, in a recruitment interview. So, there were initially about 40, 41 people who contacted me. Six of those unfortunately had to be excluded from the study because of a, a need for translation services in basic communication. The other 35, they were recruited over the telephone through that interview and then were allocated to an interview, interviewer to conduct the ten interviews. In terms of recommendations, not really, we haven't put forward any, any recommendations for how to go forward over the next twelve months. What we only have recommended are those, sort of, I would call them reactive, proactive responses to what I mentioned earlier on how to do things differently in the hotel if the hotels get up and running on the scale as to what they did earlier, well, last year. So, no, no, no kind of strategic or local authority level recommendations thus far but we're still in the early stages of analysis and I should emphasise that what I have presented here is (inaudible 01.15.07) analysis, which is basically just skimming the surface of, of the detail that we've, that we've actually got.

 

Moderator: Okay, thanks Steven. And then possibly lastly, depending on, on, on time and Ady's view of time, Susan you mentioned peer advocacy and one person wondered whether you've got any observations on how to manage peer advocacy? And then in response to comments from you, Susan, and also Atara and Laurence on vaccinations, a question about how one might endeavour to keep people engaged so that once they've had the first dose there's every chance that they also get a second? But if we start with peer advocacy first, Susan, and then perhaps move on once again to the issue of vaccination.

 

F: So, homeless health peer advocacy is an established model and for those that aren't familiar with a big provider, one of the best known providers is Grantwell (ph 01.16.19), so do look up their website. I mean, essentially if you're going to use peer advocacy you are best commissioning it from an established provider that has a framework for recruitment, training, support because it is a very challenging role. So, my best advice is if you're having-, if you're wondering about how to manage peer advocates, do it alongside a third sector partner whose business it is. On the, on the getting people back for the second vaccination, yes, it's, it's kind of similar to the question about how do, how do we engage people? We, we have to develop all the means and mechanisms that, that, that we use anyway. There's a lot of support that we all need to be giving each other on, on kind of myth-busting and understanding the benefits of the vaccination. You know, I have friends who are sceptical and sometimes I'm wondering why they're my friends but, you know, it's, it's a challenge, it's a challenge for all of us to understand why this is important and why we need to and then time difference between the first and the second and all that kind of stuff. So, we're all in this together and we just have to find ways of supporting each other to do the right thing for our own well-being and for the well-being of, of, of others. So, all out, all our outreach techniques need to come into play and maybe some incentives, you know, but I'll leave people to imagine what kind of incentives might bring people back for a second vaccination.

 

Moderator: Okay. Atara or Laurence, any, any final observations before I hand back to, to Ady?

 

F: I'll just say, a bit like Susan, I think I'm, I'm, I'm more concerned at the moment about people taking the first vaccination 'cause there is so much misinformation going on. So, I think that's where we're focusing at the moment.

 

Moderator: Yes, there's an observation I noticed in the Q&A about whether there was any research on, on vaccination hesitancy. I must confess, I'm not aware of any formalised research. I don't know whether you are, Susan, from your-,

 

F: Yes, I'm-, there is and I'm sure I can, I can find some links. The, the-, I mean, this is a wholly unusual, as the word goes, unprecedented set of requirements so, you know, people-, the, the, the toxic effect of Andrew Wakefield on MMR uptake is extremely well-researched but this is in a whole different league in terms of how many people have to be vaccinated and, and, and maybe for several years. We don't know that yet. It may be a bit like the flu vaccination that we need to keep on having, so I'm sure researchers are on the front foot to try and, and map what's happening. Yes.

 

Moderator: Lovely, thank you Susan and thank you Atara, Laurence and Steven for answering people's questions and observations in the chat. I hope I've reflected more or less accurately what, what came through down the line, as it were. Ady, back to you.

 

Moderator: Yes, so thanks Michael. So, thank you everyone for your contributions. Thank you to the speakers. Michael, can you just put up the slide that shows the further sessions in the series and maybe just talk through an update of where we are on that? Because as I said at the beginning, this is the fourth of a series of eight webinars, so we have a few more to go.

 

Moderator: Yes, we do. So, thank you Ady. Hopefully everyone can see the slides.

 

Moderator: Not yet. They're not up yet.

 

Moderator: Oh.

 

Moderator: Try again.

 

Moderator: Oh, right. They're on my system. Okay, let me come out again. Right.

 

M: The problem I had, Michael.

 

Moderator: Yes, yeah. There we go.

 

Moderator: Yes.

 

Moderator: Is that better?

 

Moderator: Yes, getting up there. Just do the same thing of full screen, if you can put it to full screen.

 

Moderator: Yeah, that's-, there we go.

 

Moderator: Brilliant, it's up, thanks.

 

Moderator: Okay, super. So, we've already had four, so the next one's on 15th February on legal literacy, which will include a focus on people with no recourse to public funds but also focus on mental health legislation, the care act itself and also the mental capacity act. 23rd February, looking at the governance of adult safeguarding and that will include findings from fatality reviews and safeguarding adult reviews. 1st March on specific issues. There's a very recent addition to that list on 1st March and that is out-of-hours services, emergency duty team provision in respect of adult safeguarding and people experiencing homelessness. And then the last planned webinar on 8th March where the emphasis will be particularly on experts by experience, feeding in their contributions. So, that's what's to come. Just a reminder that if you have examples of positive practice, case studies, examples of commission services, innovative practice directly with people experiencing homelessness or how services are organised around the person, would you please send those examples to me, and that's my email address for any contributions for the briefing, which I'm to write at the end of the eight webinars. There has been a recent publication on the LGA website of the first ever national analysis of safeguarding adult reviews in England, and that's where you can find the full report and also a video presentation. And this is being organised through the care and health improvement programme, as Ady identified, and there are some webinars coming up on making safeguarding personal and also some data on the impact of the pandemic on safeguarding adult concerns and the enquires. And that's it Ady.

 

Moderator: Thank you. So, that's all we've got time for now, so thank you again to everybody for the questions and the input. Thank you, huge thank you to our speakers for their contributions. Thank you everyone for joining us, we hope that you found it useful and helpful in terms of the work that you're doing. The presentation will be available on the LGA website, hopefully within the next 48 hours. If you go to the events page where you registered, you should be able to find the links there and the recording should be available within a couple of days and we'd really encourage you to use that with your colleagues, with your teams, with your partners in, in whichever way you might find most useful. Just wanted to say that-, alert you that there'll be a short survey which will be sent to you, which will ask you for some feedback and we'd be very grateful for any feedback on how-, 'cause this is fairly new territory, this kind of using virtual webinars for this kind of work, so we would be very grateful for your feedback on this morning's event. So, thank you, finally, and stay safe. Thanks for joining us. Thank you Michael for co-hosting with me and hope everyone has a good day and a good week ahead. Thanks everybody. Bye.

 

Moderator: Bye.

 

Moderator: Bye.

Presentations

Social injustice kills on a grand scale: health, homelessness and housing supply (pdf)
Susan Harrison, London COVID-19 Homeless Health Response

Homelessness Response to Covid-19 (pdf)
Atara Fridler, Brent Skylight Director, Crisis and Laurence Coaker, Head of Housing Needs, Brent Council

A qualitative study of the views and experiences of people (with experience of rough sleeping / homelessness) who were temporarily accommodated in two London hotels during the 'Everyone In' initiative (March - September 2020) (pdf)
Dr Stephen Parkin, Research Fellow, National Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London