This section contains analysis of the full results from the survey.
Councils were asked, if possible, to provide the following quantities:
- Homelessness approaches from new Ukrainian arrivals - this is the total number of approaches to the local authority by affected Ukrainian arrival households since 24 February.
- Homelessness applications taken from new Ukrainian arrivals - this is the number of homelessness applications the local authority has taken from those approaches.
- Households accommodated in relation to new Ukrainian arrivals - this is the number of affected Ukrainian arrival households the local authority has placed into temporary accommodation.
For each quantity, councils were asked to provide the figures broken down by scheme. The breakdown options were the Ukraine Family Scheme, the Homes for Ukraine Scheme, and ‘Other or scheme not known’. It should be noted that the London Councils survey did not ask for a breakdown by scheme, so, for the purpose of the analysis in this report, all cases provided by London councils have been classified as ‘Other or scheme not known’.
Breakdown of respondents by frequencies provided
Of the 194 respondents, 137 (70 per cent) provided a total of zero homelessness approaches from new Ukrainian arrivals, whilst 57 (29 per cent) provided a total of one or more. For homelessness applications, 157 (80 per cent) provided a total of zero and 37 (19 per cent) provided a total of one or more. For households placed in temporary accommodation, 167 (86 per cent) provided a total of zero and 27 (14 per cent) provided a total of one or more.
Responses of one or more tended to be heavily concentrated at the lower numbers, with 26 (45 per cent of respondents reporting a total of one or more) reporting a total of one homelessness approach, 22 (59 per cent) reporting a total of one homelessness application, and 14 (52 per cent) reporting a total of one household placed into temporary accommodation.
Total quantities reported by respondents
Tables 3, 4 and 5 show the total figures provided by the respondents for homelessness approaches, homelessness applications and households accommodated respectively. It should be noted that these figures relate only to the 63 per cent of councils which responded to the surveys, thus these totals are likely to underestimate the totals across England as a whole. An attempt to estimate overall England figures is provided in the following section.
Table 3 shows that the respondents reported a total of 144 homelessness approaches from new Ukrainian arrival households between 24 February and the time of completing the survey. Of these, 44 approaches (31 per cent) were classified under the Ukraine Family Scheme, 36 approaches (25 per cent) were classified under the Homes for Ukraine Scheme, and 64 approaches (44 per cent) were provided as ‘Other or scheme not known’. Approaches were most prevalent among districts, London boroughs and unitary councils, and in the East of England, Greater London and South East regions.
Table 3: Respondent totals for homelessness approaches from new Ukrainian arrivals since 24 February.
|
Approaches (Total)
|
Approaches (Ukraine Family Scheme)
|
Approaches (Homes for Ukraine Scheme)
|
Approaches (Other or scheme not known)
|
Overall
|
144
|
44
|
36
|
64
|
|
District
|
40
|
21
|
1
|
18
|
London borough (from the London Councils survey)
|
33
|
0
|
0
|
33
|
Metropolitan district
|
12
|
9
|
0
|
3
|
Unitary authority
|
59
|
14
|
35
|
10
|
|
East of England
|
43
|
8
|
21
|
14
|
East Midlands
|
6
|
6
|
0
|
0
|
Greater London (from the London Councils survey)
|
33
|
0
|
0
|
33
|
North East
|
4
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
North West
|
14
|
0
|
14
|
0
|
South East
|
24
|
16
|
0
|
8
|
South West
|
6
|
2
|
0
|
4
|
West Midlands
|
11
|
7
|
1
|
3
|
Yorkshire and Humber
|
3
|
3
|
0
|
0
|
Table 4 shows that the total homelessness applications from new Ukrainian arrival households was 78, consisting of 23 (29 per cent) under the Ukraine Family Scheme, 21 (27 per cent) under the Homes for Ukraine Scheme, and 34 (44 per cent) under ‘Other or scheme not known.’ Districts reported relatively few applications compared to their high number of approaches, with unitary authorities and London boroughs reporting the greatest volumes. As with homelessness approaches, the regions with the greatest number of homelessness applications were the East of England, Greater London and the South East.
Table 4: Respondent totals for homelessness applications taken from new Ukrainian arrivals.
|
Applications (Total)
|
Applications (Ukraine Family Scheme)
|
Applications (Homes for Ukraine Scheme)
|
Applications (Other or scheme not known)
|
Overall
|
78
|
23
|
21
|
34
|
|
District
|
18
|
12
|
0
|
6
|
London borough (from the London Councils survey)
|
23
|
0
|
0
|
23
|
Metropolitan district
|
6
|
6
|
0
|
0
|
Unitary authority
|
31
|
5
|
21
|
5
|
|
East of England
|
32
|
4
|
21
|
7
|
East Midlands
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
Greater London (from the London Councils survey)
|
23
|
0
|
0
|
23
|
North East
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
North West
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
South East
|
14
|
11
|
0
|
3
|
South West
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
West Midlands
|
4
|
3
|
0
|
1
|
Yorkshire and Humber
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
Table 5 shows that respondents reported having placed a total of 62 households in temporary accommodation at the time of completing the survey. This consisted of 16 households under the Ukraine Family Scheme, 21 households under the Homes for Ukraine Scheme, and 25 households reported as ‘Other or scheme not known’. Households placed in temporary accommodation tended to be concentrated in unitary authorities, London boroughs, and in the East of England and Greater London regions.
Table 5: Respondent totals for households placed into temporary accommodation
|
Accommo-dations (Total)
|
Accommo-dations (Ukraine Family Scheme)
|
Accommo-dations (Homes for Ukraine Scheme)
|
Accommo-dations (Other or scheme not known)
|
Overall
|
62
|
16
|
21
|
25
|
|
District
|
11
|
9
|
0
|
2
|
London borough (from the London Councils survey)
|
18
|
0
|
0
|
18
|
Metropolitan district
|
5
|
4
|
0
|
1
|
Unitary authority
|
28
|
3
|
21
|
4
|
|
East of England
|
28
|
3
|
21
|
4
|
East Midlands
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
Greater London (from the London Councils survey)
|
18
|
0
|
0
|
18
|
North East
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
North West
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
South East
|
9
|
8
|
0
|
1
|
South West
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
West Midlands
|
5
|
3
|
0
|
2
|
Yorkshire and Humber
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
Estimation of potential totals across England
As noted above, the figures provided in Tables 3, 4 and 5 are the totals from respondent councils, not necessarily the actual totals across England. Around 38 per cent of councils did not respond to the survey, meaning that the totals above are likely to significantly underestimate the true figures.
This section summarises estimated totals across England, using average values for respondent councils to estimate potential values for non-respondent councils. It should be noted that the figures in this section refer not to confirmed and definite cases but to estimates of the likely overall prevalence of cases across the country.
The methodology used for this process of estimation was as follows:
- Councils were broken down into sub-categories based on their authority type and region – for example, district councils in the East Midlands;
- Non-respondent councils were assigned the average value for their sub-category;
- For two sub-categories, the overall average for England was used instead of the sub-category average. One had a response rate of below 20 per cent within the sub-category, and the other contained an outlier council with very high reported figures. In both cases the England average was used instead because the sub-category averages were not sufficiently reliable;
- These estimated figures were added to the reported figures provided by respondent councils to result in estimated overall totals for this time period.
It should be borne in mind that this estimation process assumes that responding councils are broadly representative of non-responding councils in terms of volumes of homelessness presentations and their distribution by region and authority type.
Table 6 shows the estimated totals for homelessness approaches from new Ukrainian arrival households since 24 February. This shows that the estimation process described above results in an estimated total of 209 homelessness approaches for local authorities across England. This constitutes estimated totals of 71 approaches (34 per cent) under the Ukraine Family Scheme, 53 (25 per cent) under the Homes for Ukraine Scheme, and 85 (41 per cent) classified as ‘Other or scheme not known’. The same regions and authority types as in the respondent totals tended to predominate, with the notable addition of the North West.
Table 6: Estimated nationwide totals for homelessness approaches from new Ukrainian arrivals since 24 February
|
Approaches (Total)
|
Approaches (Ukraine Family Scheme)
|
Approaches (Homes for Ukraine Scheme)
|
Approaches (Other or scheme not known)
|
Overall
|
209
|
71
|
53
|
85
|
|
District
|
58
|
30
|
1
|
26
|
London borough (from the London Councils survey)
|
38
|
0
|
0
|
38
|
Metropolitan district
|
24
|
15
|
2
|
7
|
Unitary authority
|
89
|
26
|
50
|
14
|
|
East of England
|
51
|
12
|
22
|
18
|
East Midlands
|
9
|
9
|
0
|
0
|
Greater London (from the London Councils survey)
|
38
|
0
|
0
|
38
|
North East
|
6
|
3
|
0
|
3
|
North West
|
35
|
2
|
30
|
3
|
South East
|
38
|
25
|
0
|
13
|
South West
|
13
|
6
|
0
|
7
|
West Midlands
|
15
|
10
|
1
|
4
|
Yorkshire and Humber
|
5
|
5
|
0
|
0
|
Note: where the scheme breakdown does not add up precisely to the total, this is a result of rounding as the process of estimation uses average figures which are not necessarily whole numbers.
Table 7 shows the estimated totals for homelessness applications taken from new Ukrainian arrival households. This shows that if responding councils were representative of non-responding councils, an estimated 101 homelessness applications had been taken across the country at the time the survey was completed. This includes an estimated 36 applications (36 per cent) under the Ukraine Family Scheme, 22 (22 per cent) under the Homes for Ukraine Scheme, and 43 (43 per cent) classified as ‘Other or scheme not known’.
Table 7: Estimated nationwide totals for homelessness applications taken from new Ukrainian arrivals.
|
Applications (Total)
|
Applications (Ukraine Family Scheme)
|
Applications (Homes for Ukraine Scheme)
|
Applications (Other or scheme not known)
|
Overall
|
101
|
36
|
22
|
43
|
|
District
|
26
|
17
|
0
|
8
|
London borough (from the London Councils survey)
|
26
|
0
|
0
|
26
|
Metropolitan district
|
12
|
10
|
1
|
2
|
Unitary authority
|
37
|
9
|
21
|
6
|
|
East of England
|
36
|
6
|
21
|
9
|
East Midlands
|
3
|
3
|
0
|
0
|
Greater London (from the London Councils survey)
|
26
|
0
|
0
|
26
|
North East
|
3
|
3
|
0
|
0
|
North West
|
4
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
South East
|
22
|
17
|
0
|
5
|
South West
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
West Midlands
|
6
|
4
|
0
|
1
|
Yorkshire and Humber
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
Note: where the scheme breakdown does not add up precisely to the total, this is a result of rounding as the process of estimation uses average figures which are not necessarily whole numbers.
Table 8 shows the estimated totals for households placed into temporary accommodation. This estimates a total of 78 households of Ukrainian new arrivals placed into temporary accommodation, including 25 accommodations (32 per cent) under the Ukraine Family Scheme, 22 (28 per cent) under the Homes for Ukraine Scheme, and 30 (38 per cent) classified as ‘Other or scheme not known’. Please note that the slight discrepancies between these figures and the total are the result of rounding. Households accommodated tended to be concentrated among unitary authorities, London and the East of England.
Table 8: Estimated nationwide totals for households placed into temporary accommodation
|
Accommo-dations (Total)
|
Accommo-dations (Ukraine Family Scheme)
|
Accommo-dations (Homes for Ukraine Scheme)
|
Accommo-dations (Other or scheme not known)
|
Overall
|
78
|
25
|
22
|
30
|
|
District
|
16
|
13
|
0
|
3
|
London borough (from the London Councils survey)
|
20
|
0
|
0
|
20
|
Metropolitan district
|
10
|
7
|
1
|
3
|
Unitary authority
|
31
|
5
|
21
|
4
|
|
East of England
|
30
|
4
|
21
|
4
|
East Midlands
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
Greater London (from the London Councils survey)
|
20
|
0
|
0
|
20
|
North East
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
North West
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
South East
|
14
|
13
|
0
|
1
|
South West
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
West Midlands
|
7
|
4
|
0
|
3
|
Yorkshire and Humber
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
Note: where the scheme breakdown does not add up precisely to the total, this is a result of rounding as the process of estimation uses average figures which are not necessarily whole numbers.