About

Refugees leaving asylum accommodation face acute homelessness risk. In 2023/24, there was a 114% increase in prevention duties and 252% increase in relief duties associated with people being homeless after leaving asylum accommodation. By December 2024, 11% of people new to rough sleeping had done so after having just left asylum accommodation.

The scale of need is growing. Asylum applications have nearly doubled since 2021. Over 124,000 people are awaiting asylum decisions as of December 2024.

Short notice periods make prevention very difficult. Refugees granted status receive a maximum of 28 days to leave asylum accommodation. Data shows this is often insufficient to secure alternative housing.

This report focuses on the interaction between the asylum and homelessness and rough sleeping systems, drawing on qualitative insights from across England. It identifies factors that can increase the risk of homelessness as refugees transition from asylum accommodation to integrating into the community. It also highlights opportunities to build on good practice by some local authorities and diaspora organisations.  

Findings:

What's Not Working

Inadequate Move-On Support

Home Office commissioned support is insufficient. Migrant Help provides leaflets and telephone guidance on housing, benefits, and eVisas. Stakeholders suggested that this information-only approach doesn't really enable people to secure housing. Leaflets are often only in English, use technical language and unfamiliar terminology.

New asylum move-on liaison officers introduced in 40 high-need areas to help refugees understand next steps and remove barriers - welcomed but too early to assess impact.

Postcode lottery of local support. Some local authorities proactively commission additional services (e.g., Greater Manchester Combined Authority’s engagement hubs, citizenship awareness sessions), but this varies dramatically by area and isn't funded nationally.

System Coordination Failures

Conflicting departmental priorities. The Home Office focus on clearing asylum backlog has increased homelessness as local authorities lack resources to meet the level of demand. Stakeholders described a lack of clarity about which department is responsible for move-on support.

Critical information sharing gaps. Asylum accommodation providers must notify local authorities within two working days of decisions, but notifications often arrive late with incomplete information (missing medical histories, important background on trauma experienced, safeguarding risks). Some local authorities are uncertain whether they can use shared data for wider strategic homelessness prevention - citing unclear rules and/or a misunderstanding of data protection.

Barriers to Accessing Housing Assistance

Refugees struggle to demonstrate that they are in priority need. Assessments are often not holistic and do not consider trauma histories or lost documentation. The process was described as "very regimented", failing to account for specific refugee circumstances. Communication barriers (language, literacy, digital access) make it harder to share personal histories that might establish priority need. Refugees may lack the long medical records expected by housing teams.

Local connection rules create impossible choices. Statutory local connection is based on asylum accommodation location, but asylum dispersal means people are placed anywhere. Creates mismatch between where refugees have a statutory local connection and where they have actual community ties, feel safe, or may find employment. Choice becomes: accept housing in an isolated area OR move to preferred area and lose access to statutory support.

Housing supply crisis compounded for refugees. Local Housing Allowance rates don't match market rents, particularly Shared Accommodation Rate which applies to single people under 35 (a large proportion of refugee population). No dedicated integration funding exists for refugees through the general asylum system (unlike specific nationality-based schemes for Ukraine, Syria, Afghanistan).

Family Reunion Creates Additional Pressures

72,840 family reunion visas have been issued since 2015 (over half to children), but local authorities are not informed when visas are granted. Only become aware when family presents, sometimes at crisis point. Creates urgent need for family-sized emergency accommodation.

Proactive planning makes a huge difference. When local authorities start housing support before the family's arrival, time in unsuitable accommodation drops from 38 days to 13 days average.

eVisa Transition Causing Access Problems

Digital barriers. Many refugees lack smartphones or reliable internet. Confusion about the process leads to delays.

Service access knock-on effects. Without physical documents, refugees struggle to open bank accounts, delaying Universal Credit and affecting the ability to secure housing. Some banks still don't recognise eVisas.

What Could Help

Diaspora Organisations: Promise and Limitations

Positive role. Diaspora organisations provide culturally sensitive support (food, clothing, mental health support, housing advice, employment assistance). More trusted than statutory services. Can bridge gaps, particularly for people without a priority need.

But facing significant constraints. Varying structures and formality levels make engagement difficult. Funding constraints limit service provision. Knowledge gaps about housing legislation. Geographic limitations - not always located where refugees dispersed.

Risk of overreliance. Some stakeholders concerned diaspora organisations expected to provide support that should be commissioned formally, creating service gaps and inconsistent support.

The Consequences

Hidden homelessness prevalent. Some refugees with priority need do not approach local authorities due to mistrust or misinformation. Rely on community networks for housing - precarious, overcrowded, unsuitable arrangements. Not visibly homeless but experiencing hidden homelessness.

Progression to rough sleeping. When social networks are exhausted (which evidence suggests happens over time), hidden homelessness can progress to rough sleeping when informal options are no longer available.

Policy Insights

Immediate Operational Changes

Evaluate the 56-day notice period extension to determine if it actually improves outcomes (trial ran until June 2025).

Review Shared Accommodation Rate for refugees under 35 - explore adjustments or exemptions to improve housing affordability in the private rental sector.

Clarify data-sharing rules so local authorities can use information from the Home Office for strategic homelessness prevention, OR tackle misunderstanding if restrictions don't actually exist.

Improve information flows by either:

• Including asylum accommodation providers under Duty to Refer
• Home Office monitoring providers more closely to meet existing notification targets

System-Level Improvements

Review move-on support effectiveness. Current Home Office-commissioned service not meeting needs - focused on short-term information rather than long-term housing stability. Local support is inconsistent, creating a postcode lottery.

Assess feasibility of a dedicated refugee integration fund. Nationality-specific resettlement schemes (Ukraine, Afghanistan, Syria) have dedicated funding and show good outcomes. People supported through the general asylum system have none.

Improve cultural competency of priority need assessments. Amend homelessness guidance to account for specific refugee circumstances (trauma, lack of documentation). Develop a standardised training framework for local authority staff.

Evaluate asylum move-on liaison officers (too early to assess impact) and standardise best practice if effective.

Support diaspora organisations strategically. Review funding mechanisms, encourage inclusive commissioning, focus on long-term capacity building. Balance this with maintaining statutory service accountability.

Longer-Term Structural Changes

Explore early integration opportunities - enabling asylum seekers to volunteer, access work (where eligible), or gain skills whilst awaiting decisions. Could improve wellbeing, employability, and strengthen genuine local connections, reducing internal migration post-decision.

Increase affordable housing supply, including targeted investment in rural areas to ease pressure on high-demand urban locations.

Review access to specialist legal advice for refugees struggling to navigate priority need assessments due to documentation challenges.

Ensure eVisa processes provide equitable access - address digital barriers, provide multilingual guidance, strengthen support mechanisms.

Key Takeaway

The transition from asylum accommodation to settled housing is failing too many refugees. The 28-to-56 day notice period extension alone won't solve this - systemic issues around information sharing, assessment processes, housing supply, funding, and coordination between departments all need addressing. Without change, more refugees will experience hidden homelessness and rough sleeping, whilst local authorities struggle with crisis management rather than prevention.

‍