Understanding Homelessness in Britain

Chapter 1

1.1: Introduction

Homelessness in Britain has been an important and widely debated issue according to Klinker, Kemp & Fitzpatrick (2000). As such, there are many potential levels for analysis and many possible approaches to conceptualizing the causes of homelessness. In presenting an overview of the causes of homelessness in the UK, it is essential to examine homelessness as a function of gaining access to adequate, affordable housing and any necessary social support needed to ensure the success of the tenancy. Also, because the nature and relationship between policy, welfare and the citizen is complex, the root causes of homelessness cannot be simplistically isolated from its effects, nor can they be partitioned out from the operation of the housing and welfare systems (Anderson and Christian, 2003). Recent research has shown that there has been a significant increase in homelessness amongst older adults in England (Brown et al. 2015). It is also known that there are multiple routes to homelessness which could be due to population ageing, a trend of first-time homelessness and continued economic vulnerability into old age without appropriate prevention and policy response (Warnes & Crane 2006; Brown 2016). People over the age of 60 are now twice as likely to register with local councils as homeless than they were seven years ago, with the figure having risen from 1,210 in 2009 to 2,420 last year (Ageuk.org.uk). In the UK it has been recognised in recent times that homelessness is a national problem that needs eradicating. Ever since the introduction of the Homelessness Act (2002), central government has increasingly encouraged local authorities to take a more proactive approach to reducing homelessness. According to recent estimates, there are around 380 000 single homeless people in Great Britain (Fitzpatrick et.al. 2017). Finding solutions to homelessness, however, is complex because the circumstances that lead to homelessness are also complex and usually involve multiple losses. People often lose homes, jobs, partners and family ties. Additionally, there is also the likely loss of confidence, self-esteem and opportunities; these losses are less obvious and often go unrecognized (Collard 1997). Over the years ideological and disciplinary arguments over the causes of homelessness have diminished. There is still ongoing debate on the conceptual model integrating the micro and macro levels antecedents to homelessness (Guirguis-Younger, McNeil and Hwang, 2014). The macro level places emphasis on structural force that exposes poor people to the risk of homelessness whiles the micro associate personal vulnerabilities to homelessness. According to the Micro level certain members of the at-risk population become more susceptible to becoming homeless due to situational crisis and inadequate buffers. It must however be recognized that micro level causes such as loses as identified by Fitzpatrick et .al (2017) which are also classified as situational crisis are mostly less acknowledged nor documented. It is imperative that the causal thinking behind the homelessness phenomena is approached with greater sensitivity by policy makers, researcher as well as practitioners implementing interventions. In light of the above, this study adopts a systematic approach to critically assess existing literature on the route to homelessness among older adults in the UK, particularly to inform social work practice.

1.2: Aims and objectives of the study

This study is aimed to:

Examine the historical perspective, welfare reform and homelessness in the UK.

It will also seek to examine existing literature on the routes to homelessness and its various consequences on individuals and society at large.

Finally, further aim to examine the existing knowledge on the effectiveness of social work intervention with older homeless adults and identify gaps in order to make recommendations to improve practice.

Achieving the above aims will serve to provide a much deeper understanding of the homelessness phenomenon, especially amongst older adult population in UK. And furthermore, inform practice on the risk factors and early warning indicators of homelessness among older adults.

1.3: Background

Homelessness is considered a global phenomenon with an estimated 100 million people worldwide affected by this problem (UN, 2005). In spite of its impact of people such as deprivation of basic daily necessities of life, i.e. water, food shelter clothing health care etc. homelessness remains a vague concept with varying definitions and categorization across countries. In the UK, homelessness is defined as a statute, however in broader terms the law defines one as homeless if they lack the legal rights to occupy accommodation or one whose primary sleeping accommodations are in locations not meant for human habitation (Housing Act 1996). In UK the problem affecting homeless older people has been a major concern for the government and effort to tackle the problem has yielded little results in recent years. Statistics from (CHAIN) Combined Homelessness and Information Network, a database used by agencies working with the homeless people in London indicates an increase in the number of street homeless people. According to a recent government publication, in Great Britain, around 4751 people in 2017 were considered homeless, representing a 15% rise from the previous year. The current statistics for 2017 per household in the UK of rough sleepers stands at 15% with an estimated projection, figures could double particularly among older adult’s population in the next thirty years without appropriate policies and prevention measures (Gov.UK.2018). Dig deeper into Understanding Homelessness in Britain with our selection of articles. Although, the steady rise in homelessness has been captured through research, finding solution to this multifaceted phenomenon continue to prove difficult due to complex circumstances surrounding homelessness. Explanation of homelessness is complex because it is not a distinct idea but rather a segment of the larger mosaic of the underclass which falls within two categories thus individual problems and structural explanation. Individual causes relate to forces such as housing market, employment, poverty and loss (Johnson et al., 2015). According to Fitzpatrick et al., (2005), the causes of homelessness which leads to rough sleeping for households and individuals can result from circumstances reflecting personal life experiences and a combination of events, such as economical or broader social factors. Similarly, in their study, Williams and Stickley (2010) posit that the experience of loss is one of the routes to homelessness, for instance loss of jobs, homes, partners, opportunities and sometimes self-esteem all have enormous effect on individuals becoming homeless, yet, these loses gradually becomes less obvious and unrecognised particularly by professionals and policy makers. Many studies have shown that employment can improve one’s quality of life, mental wellbeing, individual’s identity and role within society (Evans and Repper 2000). The experience of homelessness can have a profound effect on the individual’s identity; promoting vulnerability, discrimination, oppression and social exclusion. Despite the problems associated with being homeless the level of stigmatizing views held by the society can significantly affect an individual’s mental wellbeing (Sayce 2000). Homeless people can sometimes feel devalued, dehumanised and sometimes forgotten. Studies suggest that there is a tendency for a homeless person diagnosed with mental illness to struggle with finding employment. Another significant factor contributing to the homeless population among adults is the current economic and political shift (Bramley and Fitzpatrick, 2017). In recent years, the free market economy has widened the gap between the rich and poor reinforcing economic inequality within society (Anderson and Christian, 2003) The right of an individual to have a roof over their head cannot be disputed but are current government policies in place to make this accessible to all? Despite government initiative to reduce homelessness, some policies can be discriminatory against people faced with this phenomenon. For example, under the Department for Work and Pension (DWP) and the housing department, older single applicants are a lower priority compared to applicants with dependants (Department of Health (DH) 2008). Such policy discrimination may have direct or indirect impact on adult single applicants. As established earlier, homelessness results from several factors rather than a single event. Homeless people may have problems with drugs and alcohol use and more likely to be experiencing poor mental health, debts family break- down, some form of abuse. some may come from institutional background, i.e. children in care etc., these are all contributing factors to homelessness (Klinker et al. 2000). In order for policies to effectively address this phenomenon of existing homelessness, it is of upmost importance for researchers and policy maker to understand lived experiences of homeless older adults. For practitioner to work effectively with homeless people and in the long term prevent homelessness. Due to these observations, the study will seek to generate a rich narrative of lived experiences of homeless older adults. It is also hoped that the research will explore how these lived experiences affects individual’s mental health and identity. Exploration of these pathways is relevant for informing policies and changing practice within social work with older homeless adults.

Chapter 2

2.1: Literature review

Homelessness is recognised as a global phenomenon that deprives individuals of the necessities of daily life, food, water, shelter, clothing, health care and social inclusion (Busch-Geertsema et al., 2016; Griffin and Block, 2013). Although there is not one agreed-upon definition of homelessness, Anderson and Tulloch (2000) attempted to refine a dynamic analysis of homelessness in the UK through examining the evidence of identifiable pathways through homelessness. Their study reported evidently three basic pathways into homelessness, coinciding with key stages in life course: youth pathways into homelessness 15-24: adult pathways into homelessness 20-50 and later life pathways into homelessness 50+ years (Anderson and Tulloch. 2000). However, the relative significance of different paths in and out of homelessness could not be accurately gauged from current research evidence. Within international literature, similar difficulties exist in defining and categorizing homelessness. For instance, the Canadian Homelessness Research Network defines homelessness as persons ‘without stable, permanent, appropriate housing, or the immediate prospect, means, and ability of acquiring it (Taylor, 2013). The US Department of Housing and Urban Development similarly describes homelessness as persons lacking adequate, regular night-time residence or whose primary sleeping accommodations are in places not meant for human habitation (Ng et al., 2013). Departments concerned with homeless people tend be specific in defining the phenomenon. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development places emphasis on adequacy and regularity, similarly the UK defines one as homeless if they do not have available accommodation, typically an individual is considered homeless if they live on the street or regularly use shelters (Taylor, 2013). Clarity surrounding the definition of homelessness continue to prove challenging due the lack of consensus around the definition of older adults in this context (Brown et al., 2015; McDonald et al., 2007). While some researchers associate individuals above the age of sixty-five as older adults, others adopt a more reflexive approach offering consideration to the health and mortality disparities between homeless adults and the general population and therefore associate individuals above 50 years as older (D’Cruz et al., 2007; McDonald et al., 2007; Ageuk.org.uk). However, for years the general definition of homelessness is mainly centred on lack of accommodation or family ties (Padgett et al, 2012). Life span approach helps us to understand vulnerabilities faced by people in late life when they encounter homelessness and due to the paucity of research on this topic, this is the main focus of the present research study.

2.2: Statistical representation of homeless people

Every year, over 300,000 individuals experience homelessness in the UK, this statistically means that 1 in 200 people in the UK become homeless (ONS 2017). Although the above figures are reported on Government documents, research shows that the above figure are underestimated as this does not include what the shelter organisation describe as the “hidden homelessness”. According to the shelter organisation there are many individuals who have nowhere to live but not recorded as needing housing assistance and end up “sofa surfing” (Butler, 2016). The shelter organisation points out that the leading cause of homelessness is ending of tenancy which accounts for 3 in 10 cases they come across and often triggered by the combination of benefits cut and soaring rent. In the UK, big regional cities have witnessed the rise in homelessness year-on-year. London remain Britain’s homelessness hotspot as 1 in every 59 people are homeless. Adults over the age of fifty make up nearly half of the homeless population today an increase from about 10 per cent in the 1990s (Brown et al., 2015; Culhane et al., 2013). Collectively, population ageing, a trend of first- time homelessness at mid-life and continued economic vulnerability into old age without appropriate prevention and policy response suggest that homelessness among older adults will significantly increase in the coming decades (Brown et al., 2015; Gonyea et al., 2010). Projections estimate that homeless population, particularly for the older people could more than double over the next thirty years (Gonyea and Melekis, 2015). Table 1 below shows a summary of homelessness statistics, with a significant increase amongst rough sleepers compared to statutory homelessness.

Unlike rough sleepers, statutory homelessness covers a sub-set of homeless households assessed or granted assistance by their local authority (Housing Statistical Release, 2018). A household is considered homeless if the local authority deems that they do not have a legal right to occupy accommodation that is accessible, physically available, which it would be reasonable for the household to continue to live in (Montgomery et al., 2013). The authorities release these figures enabling them to detail the response. They are used to identify the broad characteristics and circumstances of those households affected by statutory homelessness. The term “homelessness” is much broader and has a number of interpretations. For example, statutory homelessness does not cover the population living in hostels, rough sleeping or those sometimes described as “hidden homeless” who may meet the definition above, but either have not approached or not received assistance from their local authority. For this reason, the figures do not directly provide a national total number of people or households affected by homelessness in England (Fitzpatrick et al. 2005; May et al., 2005). The actions of local authorities are guided by their legal duties, in particular the Housing Act 1996, the Homelessness Act 2002 and the Localism Act 2011. For households, which are unintentionally homeless and, in a priority, need category (such as having dependent children) the local authority has a main duty to secure settled accommodation. The local authority has a duty to ensure suitable temporary accommodation is provided until settled accommodation is available. These households are referred to as statutorily homeless acceptances. As well as the statutory duties to priority need households, local authorities also have a duty to provide free advice and assistance to all households threatened with homelessness. Local authorities often go beyond this to proactively attempt to prevent or relieve homelessness. These actions are discretionary and thus approaches may vary considerably between authorities. Variations in levels of prevention activity may reflect differences in local authority policy, demand, availability of resources, or a combination of these. The level of prevention and relief activity may affect the number of acceptances (Buckingham, 2010). The local authorities take positive action to assist households who consider themselves to be at risk of homeless (Bramley & Fitzpatrick, 2018). Prevention enables households to remain in their existing accommodation or obtain an alternative for at least the next 6 months. A small number of households may appear in both the prevention and acceptances figures. Relief refers to positive actions to secure accommodation for households that have already become homeless. This release provides statistics on prevention and relief since 2009. The statistics show that London, the capital has been badly affected compared to other parts of the UK. Figures show that between 2009/10, the numbers of homeless people stood at 3,673. Over the years there was a sharp rise, and as at 2015/16 the figure stood at 8,096 which is more than 56% increase. While this rise was not contained, a change in government policy in 2016 onward shows that from 2015/16 – 2016/17, there was slight increase, this increase stood as the lowest compared to previous years. www.crisis.org.uk. While this saw a sharp fall compared to previous years, there’s need for policy that will be more effective in tackling this problem. Although a change in government policy has not stopped the steady increase which is a reverse from previous statistics result, however with the Local authority statutory homeless case between 2009/10, statistics figures for this year stood at 89,120 and in 2010/17 there was a sharp increase which stands at 115,550 a difference of 30% during this period. The result is in comparison to the 2015/16 -2016/17 which saw a slight increase with homelessness in the among the local Authority Statutory homelessness cases Another common interpretation of homelessness is rough sleeping. Rough sleepers are defined by the government as "people sleeping, or bedded down, in the open air (such as on the streets, or in doorways, parks or bus shelters); people in buildings or other places not designed for habitation (such as barns, sheds, car parks, cars, derelict boats (Osborne and McLaughlin,2004). The statutory homelessness system however, exclude many single homeless people for whom there is no comparable integrated dataset, and where information on this group is compiled it is difficult to say how complete or comparable it is or not (Fitzpatrick et al., 2017). Hence this study will be draw on the definition of rough sleeper to classify the homeless older adult. Existing literature quantitatively examines older adult’s homelessness with a few contributing to the knowledgebase of the phenomenon qualitatively (Griffin and Black, 2013). Evidence suggest that only a few studies have offered opportunity to people experiencing the phenomenon themselves, instead deferring to the expertise of service providers and professionals in the field. Critics continue to argue that the exclusion of client voice is damaging to social worker/ client relationships, which re-enforces discrimination and oppressive practice which leaves clients feeling exploited and their voice devalued (Davies and Kelly, 1976; Griffin and Block, 2013). In their literature review, Grenier et. al., (2016) recommended the need to pay attention to the lived experience of older adult homelessness. After all, in order to implement effective policies that address the pathways into and barriers to exiting homelessness, it is essential for policy makers and researcher to understand the lived experiences of homeless older adults, rather than categorising this subpopulation together with their younger counterparts (Perry, 2016). Unlike youth homeless, the pathway into homelessness among older adults is not clearly articulated in research (Grenier et al., 2013). Evidence suggest that homelessness among older adult results from cumulative difficult conditions or triggered events and often, a single incident does not make homelessness a preferable choice. While Bhurga (2007) study identifies lack of stable housing, compounded with ill-health and job loss as influential characteristics into homelessness, Anderson and Tullock, (2000) in their systematic review of evidence concluded that poverty and low income as powerful predictors to the routes of homelessness. Their paper did not allow for the basic categorisation to route of homelessness such as loss or addiction; considering this has the most immediate impact on older adults. Interestingly, results from the various researches commissioned by the Central Government to study the causes of homelessness found poverty as the single most common characteristic to the phenomenon among particularly among older adults (Drake, O’Brien, & Biebuyck,1981; Anderson, Kemp, & Quilgars, 1993; Niner, 1989; O’Callaghan et al., 1996). However, in their review of 200 studies Fitzpatrick et al., (2000), provides a strong trend towards explaining some simple routes to homelessness as a social problem rather than shortage of houses. Consistent with Anderson and Tullock, (2000), Fitzpatrick and colleagues further attributes other factors such as debts i.e. mortgage or rent arrears, alcohol misuse, experience of prison, physical and mental health problems, widowhood etc. as simple routes to older adults homeless. Although their findings did not result from direct investigation, the comprehensive nature of their study reflects an accurate picture of the routes to homelessness. The findings of their research highlight the fact that the housing dimension of homeless must be given considerable attention by policy makers. Subsequently a quantitative research by Kemp, Lynch and Mackay, (2001), explaining the correlation between structural determinants and causes of homelessness in Britain, considered factors such as housing demand and affordability, unemployment and deinstitutionalization. Findings of their research indicated a strong relationship between housing market and homelessness. The study, consistent with dominant structural justifications concluded that, despite behavioural factors attributed to homelessness, structural trends also contributed to the aggregate levels of homelessness. Drawing on these evidence shows that some group of people are at higher risk to homelessness than others. (Fitzpatrick et al., 2000; Kemp et al., 2001; Third & Yanetta, 2000). For example, an unemployed individual facing eviction is at higher risk than one affected by only housing crisis. The interaction between poverty and personal characteristics requires a more refined analysis to better provided effective support towards moving out of homelessness.

2.3: Economic, structural and policy conditions

Empirical research emphasises the role of structural economic and micro policy conditions such as poverty, scarce affordable housing and unemployment and of personal vulnerability such as behaviour and disability as causes of homelessness (Lipmann et al, 2004; Avramov, 1995; Greve, 1991 & Lee et al, 2003). This argument by structural influenced theorists point to the lack of ability and resources to cope with the roles and responsibilities to compete in the housing and employment markets, particularly in the face of a job loss. Homelessness is viewed as partly an array of forces operating in urban housing markets that have reduced the supply of affordable housing. The argument attributes globalisation and urbanisation leading to unfair land use policies as contributing to negative impact rendering the construction of low-income housing impossible (Shlay & Rossi, 1981; Ritzdorf, 1984) Some argue about the knock-on effect of unemployment and long-term joblessness contributing to reduced income levels and poverty hindering former able households from assisting their poor friends or kin exposing the ‘hidden homelessness’ (Rossi, 1989; Milhaly, 1991). See chapter 4 for full discussion.

2.3.1: Unemployment and homelessness

Fitzpatrick et al., (2012) reported a strong relationship between homelessness and the housing markets. Also, affordability, unemployment and deinstitutionalization predicted occurrences of homelessness. However, the authors report that rates of unemployment were powerful predictors of homelessness. Consistent with dominant structural explanations, the study concluded that while behavioural factors may be important in explaining individual cases of homelessness, structural trends did affect the aggregate level of homelessness from 1980–1988 (DCLG, 2013). Taken together, the evidence shows that some groups are more at risk of homelessness than others (Fitzpatrick et al., 2000; Kemp et al., 2001; Third & Yanetta, 2000). For example, people impacted by both unemployment and housing crisis are more at risk of homelessness than those affected by housing issues alone. However, the causal processes that link proximal and distal—risk and trigger—factors of homelessness still required refinement. It is in trying to explain the interaction between poverty and personal characteristics that there remains a need for a more refined analysis of becoming homeless and moving out of homelessness or pathways.

2.3.2: Austerity, welfare reform and homelessness and resent policy context

According to Pleace (2000), rough sleepers is on the rise due to government’s ineffective policies to stop homeless people from going back to the street. Years of austerity policies, welfare reform, recession and unemployment are all to blame for the increased rate of rough sleepers (Fitzpatrick et al., 2017). Having recognized that past policies have been unable to reduce the numbers till date, the government have gone further to introduce new laws which is believed will help reduce the current problem in England. The new legislation governing homelessness in the society is The Homelessness Reduction Act 2017. The introduction of new laws must first consider the reasons behind individuals getting themselves into such problems, therefore the government need to prioritize this problem across government policies (McNaughton 2008). Prioritizing the problem is one thing but preventing rough sleeper from going back to the street is another. There have been several approaches towards this problem and how it can be reduced. According to Anderson & Christian, 2003; Clapham (2003), the believe that it is a pathway that leads a rough sleeper out of homelessness have been acknowledged. The process of securing a hostel place, training, healthcare and rehab is a positive move, that is if it is on offer, but these is only available to a few.

2.3.3: Available service and barriers to support

There are currently a number of day centre being run by charity organization in order to assist in reducing rough sleeping at the moment, but one will ask how far they can carry on without support from the government or the public. These charities some of which are Christian faith organization with the purpose of not only bring them from the street but assist with their reintroduction into the society. According to Cloke et al, stated that churches and charity run 85% of these day centres, what distinguishes post-secular charity from others is a receptive generosity (Cloke et al., 2010, p. 57). However, Smith and Harding (2005, p.1) describe them as organization that provide a range of support that is not just accommodation but assistance to reintroduce rough sleepers back into the society, but some of this comes with conditions about their Christian faith which many are not fully in agreement with. This on its own is a barrier to those of different faith and may feel marginalized / discriminated against due to their faith and may not be willing to approach these charities for assistance rather remain on the street without doing anything about their situation (Bowpitt et al., 2013). According to Johnsen and Fitzpatrick (2009), in a recent survey of faith-based provision for rough sleepers affirmed the prevalence of this approach, which is not at all encouraging for those in need of assistance. Regardless of their ethnicity, race, religion, sex, age etc., no one should be made to feel exempted from the support needed to better their situation. Another barrier was highlighted by Cooper (2001), who argued that some day centres only accept service users on a self-referral basic and do not accept walk in section for members of the public. These on its own is a problem for individuals who are willing to seek help from charity organisations but have no one to refer them. In this instance, Mendes and Moslehuddin (2006), highlighted the need for social workers to play a major role in supporting people who are vulnerable and at risk of multiple exclusion and homelessness. While this will be encouraging to many who have been desperate to get help, it will also help to bring down the barriers of exclusion which is perceived by many as the hindrance. Current literature acknowledges the issues around policies, aging population, socio-economic crisis, poverty, unemployment etc as some of the key factors contributing to homelessness. However, there appears to be a gap in social worker involvement with older adult who are considered homelessness. The trend with social services is more in line with assessing social needs.

Chapter 3

3.1: METHODOLOGY

Purpose of study

The purpose of the study is to examine the issue of homelessness in UK. The study aims to analyse the level of homelessness, the causes of the homelessness, and how homelessness is tied to policies in the country. In order to investigate the topic, systematic review will be applied. This topic is important in social work research because it helps to build knowledge concerning an important social issue facing the society in UK.

Gaps

The gaps that this study aims to address include the relationship between homelessness and policies in UK, the economic effect of homelessness, and how homelessness affects the health status of society in UK.

Systematic review

In this study, the systematic review was used as the research method. Systematic review is a form of research method that collects and analyse evidence from already existing studies using an investigative approach (Aveyard, 2007). The process follows a set protocol to develop a theoretical agenda, identify a research question within specific criteria and establish evidence from existing literature to inform practice. Gough et al, (2012) defines a systematic review as an assessment of existing studies through, explicit accountable method. Similarly, Boland (2013) describes a systematic review as a process that takes a well-defined and transparent step to investigate and synthesise findings to answer specific research questions. In light of these definitions Butler et at. 2016 and Boland et al. (2014) stipulates that systematic review follows a strict protocol using rigorous and explicit procedure to identify relevant studies for a trustworthy result. A well-defined search protocol using pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria will be used to obtain relevant studies in exploring the question under study.

Research question

What is policy context, routs and consequences to homelessness and effectiveness of SW intervention with older homeless people?

As highlighted by aromatic and Pearson (2014) one of key characteristic of systematic review is to answer a specific question and not simply provide an overview of literature. According to Bettanny-saltikov (2012) the review protocol, search strategy, data extraction and formation of inclusion and exclusion criteria is mainly dependant on the well-defined question. In light of Bettanny-Saltikov (2012) analysis of systematic review, the study utilised the population exposure and outcome (PEO) framework to develop a well-defined research question to “examine the policy context, routs and consequences to homelessness and effectiveness of SW intervention with older homeless people”. Aveyard (2012) and Butler 2014 all posit that this framework supports the formulation of well-defined question. To be able to answer the question, this systematic review has elected Population, Exposure and Outcome (PEO) format instead of the Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome (PICO) format. This is because the review does not seek to compare the chosen group to another group, but rather to focus on the factors that make this group more likely to become homeless as the knowledge of this provides an understanding into why homelessness among older adult is on the rise. Bettanny-Saltikov (2012) describes PEO as a design for reviewing questions that are qualitative and appropriate for non-comparative studies.

The key factors highlighted on the above table have been used to refine the research question which is, ‘Routes to homelessness and homelessness among older adults.’ After formulating the research question, a range of databases, which includes the Cochran database, Google and Google Scholar, EBSCO host PubMed and British Journal for Social work and Policy reports were searched to ensure that similar reviews had not already been published.

3.2: Data Collection

Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria

After searching the databases and confirming no similar review exists, the PEO inclusion/exclusion process was formed to reduce unnecessary search reports (see Fig: 2 Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria). This process allows the review to present the targeted audience, and to narrow and ease the search process for the studies that will be considered to answer the review question. This process also reduces bias because it provides a clear, consistent and logical validation for the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Torgerson (2003) states that a good quality systematic review must present an inclusion and exclusion criteria that is rigorous and transparent in its report. A rigorous approach was applied to the criteria for inclusion and exclusion. Qualitative and quantitative studies was sought to gain a wider knowledge of the subject matter and eventually, the review included qualitative and quantitative studies that met the inclusion criteria. However, only studies published in the UK have been selected for this review and the implication to this is that valuable studies published in other Country will be missed, which may overestimate or underestimate the review result. Bettany-Saltikov (2012) states that systematic reviews can be biased in a way that papers are selected, for instance if not all primary research papers available have been included or if the research only includes papers from a specific region and ignores papers from other country which may have found different results. Higgins et al (2008) state that bias is a systematic error, or a deviation from the truth in result or inferences, which could lead to underestimation or overestimation of result findings. However, the review maintained a transparent selection and appraisal process to reduce bias. The criteria were set to focus mainly on homeless older adult in the UK only. Other related studies not dealing with homelessness but only looking at DV, mental health have been excluded because there is a rise in older adult homelessness according to the recent research has shown that there has been a significant increase in homelessness amongst older adults in England (Brown et al. 2015; Centre for Policy on Ageing; Diversity in Older Age – Older homelessness 2017).

To locate published relevant studies for this review, the search strategy was specific and systematically done using key words from the research question and the PEO inclusion criteria (see Fig 3: PEO – Search Terms). This allowed for the relevant information to be captured and further reduce bias. Relevo et al. (2012) suggests that a good search strategy for systematic review must apply highly sensitive controlled vocabulary and text words within the formulated question and in the set criteria, through selected databases. Multiple electronic search engines and databases were comprehensively searched to ensure that similar review questions do not already exit and for the search to expose, explore and retrieve a wide range of relevant studies for the review. Furthermore, a hand search was also conducted to find relevant literature. Newman et al. (2005) states that a poor search strategy and failing to construct an extensive comprehensive search for relevant studies can increase bias in a systematic review study.

3.2.1: Data Extraction

There are many different routes into homelessness in old age including personal factors which may take the form of gradual decline or a catastrophic event and structural factors within society as a whole (Warnes and Crane, 2006). While these personal and structural situations and events may be contributory factors leading to homelessness, they are not a total explanation. While one older person may have the resilience to withstand adverse events and not become homeless, a second in the same situation may have poorer coping strategies (CPA, 2017). While homeless older people themselves tend to cite internal factors as the reason for homelessness, people working with older homeless people tend to cite external factors as the reason for homelessness, people working with older homeless people put greater emphasis on the personal attributes of the older homeless person (Alden, 2015). This research will systematically review the extant literature on the policy context, routes and consequences to homelessness and effectiveness of social work intervention with older homeless people.

The support of Kent University Drill Hall Library was utilised to achieve the search results. Boolean search terms were also used to illustrate and broaden the search results for the review as seen in fig 3. Santy and Smith (2007) describe Boolean operators as a technique that places a term between the main words of a search to enable the database or search engine system to recognise a detail of what is being searched for. The main Boolean operators used for the search were AND, OR, AND NOT. Following an unsatisfactory search result using Google, Google Scholar and Library search, a further search was conducted using the following databases: International Bibliography of the social sciences (IBSS), social policy and practice and CINAHL. These databases provided the most appropriate materials and relevant studies that contained the review question and the PEO Criteria. The chosen search terms on the PEO table were reduced to the following key words: Homelessness*, poverty*, welfare regimes*, UK*. This process was to enable access to all forms of rooted words; for example, homelessness* can mean homeless or rough sleeping. The reduced key words provided significant turnover for the search result, however, this process experienced some challenges, for example homelessness* turned over papers containing international comparison, affordable housing, gang crime, DV, etc. However, these limitations where managed by systematically sifting each study. Mulrow (1998) states that searching for the relevant papers for a systematic review can be a difficult and complex process. The review encountered grey literature during the search. Rothstein et al. (2006) describe grey literature as materials which have been produced at all levels of government, academic, business and industry either in print or electronic formats, which are not regulated by commercial publishers. Grey literature may contain useful information that can be practical for planning and including such materials in a systematic review may help to address issues of publication bias. However, the review did not include grey literature published or unpublished outside academic channels of distribution, but only studies from trusted published authors whose publications have been highly referenced. The grey literature was searched through electronic database.

Sifting process

To decide which studies meet the review inclusion and exclusion criteria, a sifting selection process was conducted, and the result is shown on the PEO table. Each section has been alphabetically numbered as Y and N. Y was used to indicate that the studies met the inclusion criteria; N was used to indicate studies that did not meet the review criteria. The abstract of studies was carefully read to establish if a study met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. When a study is unclear, the paper was read in detail and where further clarity was needed, the review supervisor was consulted for guidance. Sharma and Sharma (2007) maintain that abstract of papers represent the contents of the paper, providing exact information to readers; without reading the abstract of a document, a search cannot be effective because the abstract alerts the reader to recognise the suitability of the document. Following the outcome of this process, further steps were taken to read the studies which met the review criteria, and which have been indicated as Y on the PEO form.

Justification of methodology

There are a number of reasons why the systematic review was selected as the research method in this study. One of them is that there is a large amount of information on the topic and there is need to reduce it into a manageable amount that is easy to analyse. Systematic review allows for the reduction. Another reason is systematic review enabled the researcher to get the data that was relevant for the study. As a research method, systematic review allows a researcher to sift through data and collect only that which is relevant. Lastly, systematic review helped to limit bias in the collection of data. By following the criteria for inclusion and exclusion, systematic review allowed for collection of unbiased data which reflect the true picture of the situation in society. This study will contribute significantly in enhancing the knowledge on homelessness and how to handle the issue. Basically, the study will help in mapping the field of routes to homelessness and effectiveness of SWW intervention; inform SW research and provide recommendations for more inclusive and effective engagement with SU voices.

Summary of Search Strategy

The outcome of the search strategy has been illustrated in the result search strategy (see fig: 5). Five hundred fifty studies were retained following a broad search of key words. Application of limiters were further applied which the reduced the selected papers to 280 eliminating unrelated papers. The dissertation supervisor was consulted in regard to geographical areas that the study should cover. The decision to focus on the UK was made because of the limited time assigned to the review and the rapid rise in homelessness among older adults in UK based as stipulated in the research question. An elimination process was conducted following the screening of the 280 studies and 100 studies met the PEO inclusion criteria. The 100 studies were further screened resulting to 40 more studies being removed. Five studies were added following the examination of citations and reference checks, resulting in a total number of 46 studies which were read. The 46 studies were skimmed read; 16 studies were excluded and the remaining 30 were further screened through the quality appraisal process, which led to 10 studies being removed. The remaining 20 studies were rigorously read and following the outcome of the methodological heterogeneity they were reduced to 15 studies for synthesis due to their recommendations being unclear. Finally, this systematic review extracted data from 10 studies out of the remaining 15. The decision to maintain 10 studies was to comply with the minimum recommended number that has been instructed for this systematic review dissertation.

CHAPTER 4

Historical context of homelessness and policy response

Historical context of homelessness

Homelessness is a phenomenon that has been existence in UK for a considerably long time. While it is hard to pinpoint the exact time when homelessness began, the issue of homelessness in UK has been around since the 16th century (Brown 2016). This is reflected in the government’s efforts to deal with the problem over time. For example, during the 16th century, the UK government began to look for ways of helping homeless individuals. Some of the ways that state tried to help homeless individuals include giving them housing and training them in certain professions so that they can manage to live a decent (Bowpitt et al 2013). The issue of homelessness in UK became prominent during the Great Depression of the 1930s. This economic depression resulted in high level of poverty, homelessness and hunger (Alden 2015). In 1960s, public concern about the issue of homelessness grew in UK since the number of homeless individuals had increased significantly. This attracted the attention of the Conservative administration at the time which started the Rough Sleeper Initiative (Anderson 2004). As a result of this initiative, the number of homeless individuals reduced significantly. Despite the Rough Sleeper Initiative, the issue of homelessness in UK persisted and in the late 20th century, the number of homeless individuals has again increased significantly. Some of the factors which caused a rise in the level of homelessness in the 20th century include economic stresses in UK and reduced availability in affordable housing such as SROs (single room occupancies) for poor individuals (Bramley and Fitzpatrick 2017). For example, as real estate prices rose, SROs reduced significantly forcing most of the individuals on the streets. Some individuals also lost their homes due to economic reasons forcing some of them on the streets. For example, in US, the economic recession of 2008 saw many people lose their homes due to inability to continue paying the mortgage. Similar cases have been happening in UK over time particularly in times when the country goes through economic problems (Anderson and Christian, 2003).

Policy response

Over time, there have been efforts by successive governments to introduce policies which can help to resolve the issue of homelessness (Bramley and Fitzpatrick 2018). For example, the Rough Sleeper Initiative was one of the earliest policies which were initiated by the state to tackle the issue of homelessness. More recently, policy response in UK has been in form of enactment of laws that which are aimed at tackling the issue of homelessness. One of the laws which are aimed at dealing with the issue of homelessness is the Housing Act of 1977 (Burrows et al 2013). The law provides that local authorities should provide permanent housing to homeless families or families that are threatened with homelessness. Another piece of legislation which is aimed at dealing with the issue of homelessness is the Homelessness Act 2002. This law was aimed at ensuring a more strategic approach is employed to tackle and prevent homelessness (Williams and Stickley 2010). The law provides that every housing authority district needs to have a homelessness strategy. This is aimed to handle the issue of homelessness from the lowest level possible. By requiring each district to have a homelessness strategy, the state intended to apply different solutions to each region since each district had its own unique causes of homelessness (Brown et al. 2015). The homelessness Act 2017 is also another law which is meant to tackle homelessness. This Act is an amendment of the homelessness legislation to allow local authorities to better deal with the problem of homelessness (GOV.UK. 2018). The law states that local authorities should provide homelessness services to all individuals affected by the problem. One of services that the law mandated local authorities to carry out is an enhanced prevention duty where the period a family is threatened with homelessness was extended to 56 days up from 28 days. This implies that housing authorities need to work with individuals or families to prevent homelessness at a much earlier stage (Bramley and Fitzpatrick 2018). The second service is for the local authorities to work with homeless individuals or families to ensure that they have secured accommodation. Apart from laws, there are other policies which have been enacted over time to try and deal with homelessness. One of the policies is the Housing First policy. Housing First is a policy which is meant to ensure that homeless individual are provided with housing as soon as possible (Johnson et al., 2015). The Housing First policy was enacted recently in UK with the pilot programme being carried out in West Midlands, Manchester, and Liverpool. This policy is aimed to considerably reduce the issue of homelessness in UK.

Poor Law and definitions of homelessness

Poor Law was a body of laws which were aimed at providing relief for the poor. The Poor Law was enacted in the 16th century and maintained until after World War II. The Poor Law went through a number of changes over time. For example, in the late 18th century, Poor Law was supplemented by Speenhamland system that involved providing allowances to employees who received wages which were considered to be below a subsistence level (Cooper 2016). However, this resulted in an increase in expenditure compelling the state to enact a new Poor Law in 1834 that regarded poverty among able-bodied individuals as a moral failing. The new law thereby prohibited relief for the able-bodied poor individuals. Instead, the government offered such individuals employment workhouses. The aim of this was to encourage individuals to seek employment as opposed to expecting help from the government (Carr and Hunter 2008). However, in the 20th century it was realized that poverty was not a moral failing and that there are many factors, most of which are beyond an individual’s power, that result to poverty. As such, the Poor Law was replaced. Homelessness is defined in a number of ways. One of the definitions is simply ‘lack of a home’. Another definition of homelessness is that homelessness is a situation where an individual or family lacks a regular, adequate, and fixed night-time residence (CPA 2017). Legally, homelessness is defined as the circumstance where an individual or individuals lack permanent living arrangement.

Beveridge’s welfare state and social protection against homelessness

A welfare state can be defined as a concept of government where the state plays a crucial role in protecting and promoting the social and economic wellbeing (Crisis Research 2013). Beveridge’s welfare state involved a government developing a social security system that can help it to fight want, disease, ignorance, squalor, and disease. Beveridge’s welfare state promotes social protection against homelessness. While Beveridge did not explicitly address the issue of homelessness in his report, he alluded to it by stating that one of evils that the state should fight against is want (Batty et al 2015). Housing is one of the most basic human wants and by indicating that want is one of the evil hat government’s social security should fight against, Beveridge’s welfare was directly talking lack of housing, clothing and food (FEANTSA 2011). An enactment of Beveridge’s welfare state thereby implies that people are protected from homelessness.

Risks to homelessness in the post-war period

After World War II, the risk of homelessness increased in UK. The increased risk of homelessness was caused by a number of factors. One of them was the economic stress after the war (Stone 2015). The war was an expensive undertaking for UK as well as other countries. The country was thereby negatively affected by the war economically which contributed to increased level of homelessness. Another factor was high level of unemployment in the post-war period (Teixeira 2015). The war had provided employment opportunities for millions of individuals. People were not only recruited in the military. There were those who worked in hospitals, in the transport sector, and many other areas of the economy. However, after the end of the war, employment reduced significantly making many people poor and homeless (Loopstra et al 2017). In addition, most of the individuals who fought in the war came back to unemployment and thereby ended up homeless after the end of the war. The need for housing is also another risk factor the contributed to homelessness in the post-war period. During the war, many people had moved away from home to go and fight in the war as well as work in other areas (LUND 2016). However, after the war, there was an upsurge in population as people returned home. This put pressure on the housing sector with there being no enough houses to accommodate all individuals. Coupled with rising estate prices, many people ended up homeless.

Thatcher period and conservative policies on affordable housing and homelessness

The Thatcher period was characterized by the right to buy conservative policies on affordable housing. During this period, the parliament of UK Passed the Housing Act 1980 that allowed council house tenants to purchase houses from the local authority (Katz 1989). This policy helped to enhance home ownership in UK. However, the conservative policies on affordable housing during the Thatcher period contributed to the housing crisis that was felt in UK in later years. This is because tenants began buying selling the houses at a higher price (Malpass and Rowlands 2010). For instance, a house which sold for £50,000 in the 1990s sold for £250,000 by 2013. Rent for council houses also increased significantly. The high cost of housing, as a result of the conservative policies during the Thatcher period, caused the housing crisis that was felt decades later. In addition, it promoted homelessness as many people could no longer afford to rent or buy a house (Murphy and Eghaneyan 2018).

Labour government and homelessness policies 2008 recession, austerity and welfare reforms and homelessness

Like other governments, the Labour government tried to tackle the issue of homelessness by introducing a number of policies. One of them is the ‘No One Left Out’ policy. The aim of this policy was to end homelessness by 2012. However, due to the economic recession of 2008 which affected mainly the housing market, the homelessness in UK increased (Pentaraki 2016). For example, by 2010, there had been an increase in homelessness by 168%. The issue of homelessness became severe during the economic recession of 2008 because many people lost their houses (Reeve 2017). As such, previous homeowners became homeless which added to the number of homeless people in the country. The increased level of homelessness despite the enactment of policies which were aimed to reduce it informed the welfare reforms of 2012. In 2012, the UK government initiated welfare reforms which were aimed at reducing homelessness (Fitzpatrick et al., 2015). One of the reforms was the introduction of the housing benefit, a social security benefit which was intended to help reduce the cost of rented accommodation. Under housing benefit, the government meets part of the cost for rented accommodation in order to help tenants afford housing (Bramley and Fitzpatrick 2017). The welfare reforms helped to reduce the homelessness although not on a large extent. This is because reduced cost of housing caused a shortage in houses implying that a significant number of people continued to live on the streets (Carr and Hunter 2008). In addition, recent welfare reforms such as bedroom tax and housing benefit cuts have fuelled the problem of homelessness as poor people are forced to move to cheaper neighbourhoods or become homelessness altogether as rent and house prices have gone up (Loopstra et al 2017).

Recent policy context and homelessness

Due to persistence in homelessness in UK, the government is constantly trying to develop policies that are geared towards handling the problem. The recent policy context involves increased funding of local authorities in order to help them solve the issue of housing (LUND 2016). In addition, the government has provided funds to homeless families so that they can find housing in the private sector. This has helped to reduce pressure on the council houses which have reduced significantly because of the high level of buying by tenants. Such moves have ensured that more people have access to housing (Stone 2015). However, negative policies such as housing benefit cuts and bedroom tax have hampered the efforts of eradicating homelessness (Pentaraki 2016). This is because such policies have increased rent prices resulting in increased repossession actions. This has made many people to end up homeless.

Analysis

Basically, homelessness has been going through cycles, with periods of high level of homelessness alternating with those of low level of homelessness. These periods have coincided with policies made (Batty et al 2015). In some cases, the effects of policies made in a particular period of time were felt in later years. For example, conservative policies during Thatcher’s period were felt in later years with increased house prices. On the other hand, the effect of some policies was felt immediately (Crisis Research 2013). For instance, the welfare reforms resulted in instant reduced homelessness. Most of the policies made were aimed at reducing homelessness although in some cases, the policies had the opposite effect (Cooper 2016). For example, while the right buy policy was aimed to help more people own homes, the long-term effect was increased homelessness as it resulted in increased property and rent prices making houses less affordable to many people.

CHAPTER 5

Findings and discussion

Findings

There are a number of findings that were obtained from this study. One of them is persistence of the issue of homelessness in UK. It was established that homelessness is a problem has endured for a long time in the UK despite efforts by government to deal with it. Another important finding is that homelessness is a consequence of many factors which include economic problems, unemployment, and poor policies. It was also established in this study that homelessness affects both the physical and mental health of victims. It was found that homeless people suffer from poor physical and mental health.

Discussion

Basically, the issue of homelessness affects almost all countries in the world, with the severity of the problem differing among countries. In addition, as indicated in the results, the homelessness has been persistent in UK for a long time (Teixeira 2015). The persistence of homelessness can be attributed to the recurrence of the causal factors. For example, countries are constantly experiencing economic problems despite the huge economic growths that have been experienced over time (Alden 2015). The results also reveal that homelessness is caused by a number of factors such as economic problems, unemployment, poor policies. The reason why economic problems cause homelessness is because economic problems in a country results in other problems such as unemployment which, in turn, enhance homelessness (Brown 2016). Economic problems also make it hard for a country to enact policies that would help it to tackle homelessness. This is because policies that can help eradicate homelessness involve significant expenditure. With regard to the effect of homelessness, the results indicate that homelessness causes both mental and physical health problems (FEANTSA 2011). The physical health problems are mostly due to the harsh conditions that one is subjected to due to homelessness. For example, most homeless individuals live on the streets where conditions are not good. Mental health problems may be due to stress and depression that one experiences because of not having a home (Malpass and Rowlands 2010).

Relationship breakdown

Homelessness and unemployment

The reviewed studies indicate that there is a strong relationship between homelessness and unemployment. It was established in this study that homelessness is rampant in situations where there is high level of unemployment (Johnson et al., 2015). The reason this is the case is because unemployment reduces the ability of individuals or families to afford housing. This forces them to be homeless.

Homelessness

Apart from unemployment, the reviewed studies also reveal that there is a strong relationship between homelessness and the prevailing policies. It was found that some policies cause an increase in homelessness while others reduce (Williams and Stickley 2010). The possible reason why policies determine the level of homelessness is because the type of policies adopted determines the price of houses. For example, a policy such as the housing benefit policy helps to reduce the cost of acquiring or renting a house making it possible for many people to acquire homes (Bowpitt et al 2013).

Childhood adversity / lack of development of like skills

Childhood adversity is one of the long-term effects of homelessness. As a result of homelessness, many homeless individuals do not get a chance of getting education or training (Murphy and Eghaneyan 2018). In addition, due to the harsh environmental conditions that one is subjected to due to homelessness, there is lack of development of like skills among children. Children do not get a chance to grow up normally and acquire the skills which are normally acquired by children growing in a decent environment (Batty et al 2015).

Behavioural problems/ mental health

Homelessness subjects one to stressful environment conditions. For example, an individual living on the streets has to constantly worry about their safety and harsh environmental conditions such cold or rain (Stone 2015). Homeless individuals are thereby constantly experiencing stress or depression causing them to have behavioural problems or poor mental health.

Substance misuse (Drugs and Alcohol)

Substance abuse is also one of the characteristics of homelessness. Most homeless individuals resort to substance misuse in order to cope up with the hard conditions they live in. However, it should be noted that substance abuse is also a cause of homelessness (Carr and Hunter 2008). Individuals who abuse drugs are likely to run away and live on the streets.

Traumatic experiences / death

Homelessness exposes one to dangers in the environment such as violent robbery and random attacks. Homeless individuals, particularly the ones that live on the streets, are also exposed to attacks by animals such as stray dogs (Teixeira 2015). As such, such individuals are constantly exposed to traumatic experiences or even death.

Prison and criminal activity

There is a strong relationship between homelessness and criminal activity as well as prison. Homeless individuals are more likely to engage in criminal activities which, in turn, make them to be jailed (Fitzpatrick et al., 2015). The reason why most homeless individuals engage in criminal activities is because of the hardships they face. The economic hardships they go through on a daily basis compel them to engage in crime in order to provide for themselves or their families.

Poverty, loss or lack of Jobs

Loss or lack of jobs and poverty are two of the main causes of homelessness. Poor individuals are unlikely to afford to buy a house or rent it. With increased property prices, such individuals are forced to be homeless (LUND 2016). Loss or lack of jobs also makes it hard for people to afford houses or rent. As such, they are forced to become homeless.

Implication to social work policies

There are a number of implications of homelessness to social work policies. One of them is that there is need for social work policies to be designed in such a way that they help resolve homelessness (Pentaraki 2016). Another implication is that social work policies should be focused on dealing with the factors that cause homelessness (Reeve 2017). For example, social work policies should be focused on alleviating poverty and promoting employment.

CHAPTER 6

Systematic analysis of the studies

In the systematic review in this study, 10 studies were identified as relevant to the study based on the criteria that were used. These studies are: Homelessness in the UK: who is most at risk?; Homelessness and social policy; Managing vulnerability: homelessness law and the interplay of the social, the political and the technical; Stories from the streets: people's experiences of homelessness; The Causes of Homelessness Among Older People in England; The impact of economic downturns and budget cuts on homelessness claim rates across 323 local authorities in England; Welfare conditionality, benefit sanctions and homelessness in the UK: ending the 'something for nothing culture' or punishing the poor?; Housing, markets and policy; Understanding the Phenomenon of Older Adult Homelessness in North America: A Qualitative Interpretive Meta-Synthesis; Human development across the life span The 10 studies selected address a number of issues concerning homelessness. The issues which these studies analyse include the causes of homelessness, how homelessness is related to social policies that a country adopt, the intricacies of homelessness, the effect of budget cuts and economic downturns on homelessness, and how homelessness is related to welfare conditionality and benefit sanctions (Bramley and Fitzpatrick 2017). One of the findings in the studies is that homelessness is caused by various factors among which is economic downturn and poor policies. Another finding among the studies is that homelessness has a negative effect on the victims (Bulman 2017). The studies also reveal that solving homelessness is complex because it involves interplay between political, social, and technical factors. The 10 studies offer high quality and relevant data as well as analysis of homelessness. The studies provide an insight into the issue of homelessness allowing one to understand the factors which cause homelessness, how the problem can be tackled and why it has been hard to resolve the problem despite many recommendations from experts and researchers (Fitzpatrick et.al. 2017). The studies provide crucial information that can be used to inform policies and strategies that should be employed to resolve the problem.

CHAPTER 7

Discussion and Conclusion

Discussion

Homelessness is a problem that has affected society for a long time and persists to date. Despite policies being developed to resolve the problem, it has been hard for lasting solutions to be developed (Stone 2015). This is due to a number of reasons. One of them is that in some cases, the government has no control over the factors which cause homelessness. For example, economic downturn is one of the factors which cause homelessness yet one that the government has little control over. In most cases, economic downturn affects many countries as opposed to one country (Murphy and Eghaneyan 2018). During economic depression people lose their jobs and are unable to service their mortgages making them to lose their houses and thereby become homeless. Another factor which makes it hard for homelessness is in some cases, the policies enacted result in an opposite effect. For example, the right to buy policy during Thatcher period was aimed to resolve homelessness by providing affordable housing to individuals (Bowpitt et al 2013). However, the long-term was a rise in the price of houses and rent thereby exacerbating the problem further rather than solving it. Due to these factors, it is important for the government to analyse the issue of homelessness and evaluate all possible outcomes of the policies that are enacted to solve the problem (Johnson et al., 2015). This way the government will be able to resolve the problem of homelessness.

Conclusion

Homelessness is considered a global phenomenon with an estimated 100 million people worldwide affected by this problem. In the UK it has been recognised in recent times that homelessness is a national problem that needs eradicating. This study aimed examine: the historical perspective, welfare reform and homelessness in the UK; examine existing literature on the routes to homelessness and its various consequences on individuals and society at large; and the existing knowledge on the effectiveness of social work intervention with older homeless adults and identify gaps in order to make recommendations to improve practice. The study established that homelessness is an issue that has been existence for a long time. In UK, homelessness was first recognized in the 16th century although it is possible it had been around for a long time. Some of the causes of homelessness include unemployment, economic downturn, and poverty. Economic downturn causes people to lose their jobs and homes due to inability to pay mortgages or rent. Unemployment, on the other hand, makes it hard for people to afford houses or rent. Homelessness has various effects. For example, it exposes people to traumatic experiences or even death, encourages criminal activities among people, and increase childhood adversity. Due to the negative consequences of homelessness, there is need for lasting solutions to be developed. For example, the UK government need to adopt policies that would not only solve the issue of housing but ones which will also address the causes of homelessness such as unemployment and poverty. This is because previous policies have not helped eradicate homelessness since they are only focused on ensuring people are provided with houses.

References

Alden, S. (2015). Public-sector service provision for older people affected by homelessness in England. Ageing and Society, 37(02), pp.410-434.

Anderson, I. (2004). HOUSING, HOMELESSNESS AND THE WELFARE STATE IN THE UK. European Journal of Housing Policy, 4(3), pp.369-389.

Bowpitt, G., Dwyer, P., Sundin, E. and Weinstein, M. (2013). Places of Sanctuary for 'the Undeserving'? Homeless People's Day Centres and the Problem of Conditionality. British Journal of Social Work, 44(5), pp.1251-1267.

Bramley, G. and Fitzpatrick, S. (2017). Homelessness in the UK: who is most at risk? Housing Studies, 33(1), pp.96-116.

Bulman, M. (2017). Number of homeless elderly people surge by 100 per cent seven years. The independent.

Carr, H. and Hunter, C. (2008). Managing vulnerability: homelessness law and the interplay of the social, the political and the technical. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 30(4), pp.293-307.

CPA (2017). DIVERSITY IN OLDER AGE - OLDER HOMELESSNESS. Centre for Policy on Ageing - Rapid review.

FEANTSA (2011). Impact of anti-crisis austerity measures on homeless services across the EU. Brussels: European federation of national associations working with the homeless.

Higgins, J. and Green, S. (2008). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Cochrane Book Series. Wiley.

Housing Statistical Release (2018). Statutory homelessness and prevention and relief, October to December (Q4) 2017: England. England: ministry of housing communities & local government.

Loopstra, R., Reeves, A., Barr, B., Taylor-Robinson, D., McKee, M. and Stuckler, D. (2017). The impact of economic downturns and budget cuts on homelessness claim rates across 323 local authorities in England, 2004“12. Journal of Public Health, 39(4), pp.874-874.

M. Katz, (1989) The Undeserving Poor: From the War on Poverty to the War on Welfare, (New York: Pantheon, 1989); H. Gans, The War Against the Poor: The Underclass an Antipoverty Policy, (New York: Basic Books, 1995).

Murphy, E. and Eghaneyan, B. (2018). Understanding the Phenomenon of Older Adult Homelessness in North America: A Qualitative Interpretive Meta-Synthesis. The British Journal of Social Work, 0, pp.1-20.

Reeve, K. (2017). Welfare conditionality, benefit sanctions and homelessness in the UK: ending the 'something for nothing culture' or punishing the poor? Journal of Poverty and Social Justice, 25(1), pp.65-78.

Sigelman, C. and Rider, E. (2012). Human development across the life span. [Belmont, Calif.?]: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

V. Tsianos, D. Papadopouls and N. Stephenson, “This Is Class War from Above and They Are Winning It: What is to be Done?”, Rethinking Marxism, 24, 3 (2012).

Warnes, A. and Crane, M. (2006). The Causes of Homelessness Among Older People in England. Housing Studies, 21(3), pp.401-421.

Williams, S. and Stickley, T. (2010). Stories from the streets: people's experiences of homelessness. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 18(5), pp.432-439.