Homelessness prevention: business and regulatory impact assessment

Summary and Recommendation

Option 3 is recommended to ensure that households at risk of homelessness are identified earlier, and homelessness averted where possible. Legislation will build on existing good practices and place a collective responsibility across public services to prevent homelessness. It should avert the costs to the public purse which accrue when assisting someone who is already homeless, which are estimated to be substantially higher than solutions to prevent homelessness.^[27]

Having legal duties in place will set clear expectations of the public sector. Additionally, legislation with accompanying guidance will best meet the collective expectations of stakeholders including those who have already expressed concerns over the delivery of the homelessness prevention duties.

The introduction of new legislation is an opportunity to ‘re-balance’ the system with regards to supporting people who are at risk of homelessness or homeless. The strong housing rights for people who are homeless in Scotland will be protected but a recognition can be given to the benefits of early intervention and prevention while providing clarity to practitioners on what is appropriate prevention activity and when it is appropriate to take a homelessness application.

Summary costs and benefits table

Option 1

Total benefit per annum – economic, environmental, social

No additional burden on relevant bodies or local authorities – business as usual.

Total cost per annum – economic, environmental, social - policy and administrative

This would be cost neutral in terms of new burdens, but the demand for temporary accommodation as a result of people moving into homelessness may increase. There is a human cost to homelessness with associated trauma, indignity and reduced quality of life.

Although good practice already exists where relevant bodies may be supporting households at risk of homelessness, this is not consistently applied therefore assistance outwith local authorities’ statutory duty may be somewhat of a ‘postcode lottery’. There are no legal drivers to influence early intervention or joint working between services.

Option 2

Total benefit per annum – economic, environmental, social

No additional burden on relevant bodies. Updating the code of guidance for local authorities may increase preventative action taken towards households at risk of homelessness.

Total cost per annum – economic, environmental, social - policy and administrative

Little additional cost but rights for homeless households would not change. As responsibility to prevent homelessness is not passed on to relevant bodies beyond housing services, opportunities to prevent homelessness continue to be missed. More people who are at risk of homelessness become homeless and are owed a statutory duty as a homeless household. More temporary accommodation is required.

Option 3

Total benefit per annum – economic, environmental, social

The social benefit is an envisaged reduction in households moving into homelessness, thus reducing trauma and indignity and improving quality of life.

Because relevant bodies are required to ask about a household’s risk of homelessness, preventing homelessness becomes everyone’s business and no longer rests solely with local authorities.

Total cost per annum – economic, environmental, social - policy and administrative

There will be an increased cost in terms of providing training and guidance, as well as additional staffing required, but this may be offset by an anticipated decrease in households moving into homelessness as a result of the duties.

Total costs estimated, split between costs on Scottish Administration; local authorities and other bodies:

£2.8 million in Year 1; £2.8 million in Year 2; £2.2 million in Year 3 (see above table for more detailed breakdown).