Home and homelessness : contributions of a homelessness charity institution to the experiences and meanings of home of young homeless people

1

Home and Homelessness:

Contributions of a homelessness charity institution

to the experiences and meanings of home of young

homeless people.

Urban Geography MSc Thesis

Brian Hinton

Email: Brian.S.Hinton@outlook.com

Student No. 11227907

Monday 31

July 2017

Supervisor: Dr. F.M. Pinkster

Second Reader: Prof. R. Ronald

2

Table of Contents

List of Figures and Tables 4

Preface 4

Chapter 1: Introduction 5

Chapter 2: Theoretical Framework 7

2.1: Introduction 7

2.2: The Concept of Home 7

2.3: Homelessness and Home 8

2.4: Mobility and Home 9

2.5: Housing and Homelessness: Young People 10

2.6: Youth Homelessness Service Delivery 11

2.7: Knowledge Gaps in the Research 12

2.8: Conclusion 12

Chapter 3: Methodology 14

3.1: Research Approach 14

3.1.A: Research Questions 14

3.2: Case Study 14 3.3: Access 16 3.4: Ethics 16 3.5: Positionality 17 3.6: Concept Definitions 18 3.7: Research Methods 19

3.7.A: Qualitative Interviews 20

3.7.B: Focus Groups 23

3.7.C: Field Notes 24

3.8: Analysis of Research Findings 24

Chapter 4: Service Delivery and the Experience of Home 26

4.1: The Staff at St Basils 26

4.2: The Services and Aims at St Basils 27

4.2.A: Key Support Work 28

4.2.B: Life Skills 28

4.2.C: Youth Engagement 28

4.3: Service Approaches, Positionality & Relationships with Young People 28

4.3.A: Positionality 29

4.3.B: Relationships with the Young People 29

4.3.C: A Psychological Approach to the Services 30

4.4: Funding Constraints to the Service 30

4.5: Contributions to an Experience of Home 31

4.5.A: Safety, Care, and Support 31

4.5.B: Control and Choice 32

4.5.C: To Be and Express Themselves 32

3

Chapter 5: The Young and Homeless Peoples Experience of Home 35

5.1: A Biographical Context of Home for the Young People 35

5.2: St Basils as a Reference Point 36

5.3: Other Homes: Home as the Outdoors 38

5.4: Other Homes: The Familial Home 39

5.5: Discussion 40

Chapter 6: The Meaning of Home 42

6.1: Home as a Foundation to Developing One’s Identity 42

6.2: Home as a Place to Connect with Others 43

6.3: Home as Exclusive Territory 44

6.4: Aspirations for a Home of One’s Own 45

6.5: The Challenges to these Aspects of Home 46

6.6: The Role and Contribution of St Basils 49

6.7: Discussion 50

Chapter 7: Conclusion 53

7.1: Answering the Research Question 53

7.2: Literature Reflection 56

7.3: Methodology and Case Study Reflection 56

7.4: Recommendations for Future Research 57

References 59

Appendices 62

Appendix A: Interview Item List: Young People 62

Appendix B: Interview Item List: Staff 65

Appendix C: Focus Group Item List 67

Appendix D: Information Sheet 70

4

List of Tables & Figures

Page No. Tables

17 Table 1: Young people’s background

characteristics

18 Table 2: Staff background characteristics

Figures

11 Figure 1: (created with: GIS ArcMap) Street

Map of Birmingham City Centre with locations of Head Office, Conybere Gardens, and Edmonds Court.

Preface

I would just like to thank St Basils for being so helpful from my time being homelessness to my academic adventure. Being part of my bachelors degree and now my masters is an amazing commitment that I am forever grateful for. I would also like to thank Dr Fenne Pinkster for her supervision. An inspiring woman and a great support throughout the thesis process.

5

1.0: Introduction

The UK is on the brink of a youth homelessness disaster (Jackson, 2015). Official figures claim that around twenty-seven thousand young people are homeless per year, whilst others claim that figure could be in fact three times higher (Independent, 2015). Sixty eight percent of homelessness institutions have seen a rise in the number of young people accessing their services over the period of one year and nearly half of all those living in homeless accommodations are between the ages of sixteen and twenty-four (Homeless Link, 2015). These statistics begin to project a harsh and grim reality for a growing number of young people in the UK today, and they are just the beginning.

Young people are now the most likely group to be living in poverty (Homeless Link, 2015), and in an era of continued austerity, they are becoming the most adversely affected. The proposed end to housing support for eighteen to twenty-one year olds alongside other welfare reforms; the shrinking availability of social housing, the larger mortgage deposit requirements from banks, and a job market saturated with zero-hour contracts and unpaid internships are to name just a few of the largest driving forces in changes to the housing pathways of young people, and ultimately an increase in youth homelessness.

Support services for young homeless people are also experiencing the era of austerity and neo-liberalism, in the form of funding cuts. Councils all over the country are making deep cuts to important homelessness funding streams. The Supporting People fund is such a stream. Set up in 2003 as a £1.8 billion national ring-fenced grant to councils to fund services to help vulnerable people live independently, it has subsequently seen a national level reduction to under £1.6 billion and more importantly the removal of the ring fence in 2009, at a time of wider fiscal cuts to local authority budgets from government. This has in effect given local councils the authority to reallocate their supporting people fund to other expenditures, which had resulted in 305 services being withdrawn entirely, and a further 685 services being reduced (Jarrett, 2012).

The housing outlook of young people and those that become homeless is bleak. It’s creating a situation where the government will be scrutinised heavily in their approach to addressing the issue. Alongside the increasing cuts to support services, it raises the question of how they are effectively managing to provide quality support and positive housing outcomes for those that are in need. This research sets out to examine this question in the form of understanding the normative meaning of home and homelessness in the UK and the role that homelessness charity institutions have in providing a service and a contribution to the experiences and meaning of home for young people in today’s UK environment.

‘The Englishmen’s house is his castle’. A 19th _{century British phrase written in law, describes} home as a physical dwelling. The term house and home have often been combined in popular rhetoric, and advanced capitalist countries have actively combined these terms along with family to increase economic efficiency and growth, an attempt to shift the burden of responsibility of welfare from the state to the nuclear family (Mallett, 2004). This has led to the perceived increase of importance of home as a source of identity, status, and security, as well as providing a sense of belonging in today’s world (Depuis & Thorns, 1996). It’s important to consider that this combination of terms threatens to create a particularly one-dimensional and specific definition of home which fails to address different social contexts. The white, westernised idea of home is commonly defined as a place of attachment and rootedness, a

6 center of meaning and care (Cresswell, 2004), as an intimate place of rest and withdrawal, a place where people can feel a sense of control over space (Seamon, 1979) and a primal, reference space which frames peoples’ understandings of the outside world (Bachelard, 1994). Deconstructing this popular, modernist meaning of home holds the main relevance of the thesis. This is because the representation of home as an idyllic safe space contradicts many people’s realities of home. Women and young people that experience violence in the home for example do not share this idyllic representation. Home is recognised as a multi-dimensional concept (Mallett, 2004) and I believe the lack of recognition of this creates a disparity in understanding of what constitutes home between individuals, groups, and institutions.

Society should be in a position where home and homelessness, and the relationship between them, can be understood well enough to result in socially and personally relevant and appropriate methods in housing people, as well as in the prevention and support for those that become homeless. Understanding how this group experiences and constructs home, as well as establishing the groups meaning of home in an institutional setting is an important starting point.

Academic literature can be a powerful tool to initiate these societal processes. Although the literature does critically examine the notion of home, there are further opportunities for research. Going a little further in the critical discussion of home. Breaking down juxtapositions, assumptions, and selective language in the home literature. Focusing on more groups, especially wholly relevant ones such as young homeless people. Recognising that there is no single meaning of home but rather many complex, often intertwined meanings. To stimulate the discussion of what home is and what home means, and applying this to suggest appropriate, well thought out recommendations to policymakers is one step closer to initiating this societal change.

7

2.0: Theoretical Framework 2.1: Introduction

Literature exploring meanings and senses of home is hardly scarce. There has been a far reaching, cross-disciplinary increase in the number of writings in recent times that span from sociology, through psychology and philosophy, to the human geographies about the meanings and experiences of home (Mallett, 2004). The current literature juxtaposes the meanings of home with homelessness. This review will challenge this dichotomy and rightfully bring together the meanings of home and youth homelessness in the UK to establish that the young and homeless population’s meanings of home are an important factor to acknowledge in today’s UK home processes. By building the UK normative meaning of home provided by the literature (see Depuis & Thorns, 1996; Cresswell, 2004; Seamon, 1979; Bachelard, 1994 as examples), and applying it as a reference, as well as exploring literature that establishes the meanings of home of the young and homeless (May, 2000; Jackson, 2015; Klodawsky, 2012: Vandemark, 2007; Somerville, 1992 & 1997 as examples), the review will highlight seemingly unobvious but integral similarities of home between highly mobile homeless people and their sedentary housed counterparts. Discussing the current national position of young people generally moving towards higher levels of youth homelessness, the review will be able to examine one of the most interesting groups in terms of current social, political, and economical processes in the UK.

Incorporating literature that explores youth homelessness (see Jackson, 2015; Quilgars, 2010 & 2012; and Quilgars et al, 2008 as examples), and the effects of mobility on home (Duyvendak, 2011: Nowicka, 2007), as well as the example of young people in the UK housing market (Clapham et al, 2013; Ford et al, 2002), the review will build a foundational understanding of the realities of experiences of home and housing for young (homeless) people. This will be positioned as a strong example of why the juxtaposition of home and homelessness is problematic and why exclusionary effects are becoming ever more apparent and important in the post-modern western world.

In this growing aura of uncertainty of home amongst young people and growing rates of youth homelessness, the review will consider the role and contributions of homelessness institutions to young and homeless people’s meanings of home and the effects of increased mobility as important. The juxtaposition of home and homelessness in the UK raises questions of whether homelessness institutions are providing services in the eye of this juxtaposition or can provide a service that is more critically aware and appropriate for a rapidly changing outlook. This will be examined through literature that has explored the delivery of youth homelessness service (see Heinze et al, 2010; Stewart et al, 2010; and Resnick et al, 1996 as examples). The point of interest for this review will be how the literature frames it’s understanding of home through its approach to analysing service delivery.

2.2: The Concept of Home

The western understanding of home is quite literally written into 19th century law (Mallet, 2004). ‘The Englishmen’s house is his castle’ was a popular British phrase which describes home as a physical dwelling. Though some scholars acknowledge that describing home with the house (Mallet, 2004: Clapham, 2011) creates a simplified combined term, much of the

8 literature seems to inattentively use this combination in their attempts to understand home. This combination of terms threatens to disengage the complex meanings of both terms individually and create a rigid term that confronts other meanings of home and specifically excludes homeless people from experiencing a sense of home.

To understand the exclusionary effects, it’s important to note that the meaning of home in the western world, as well as being conflated with family, was actively marketed to increase economic efficiency and growth which was intended to shift responsibility of welfare from the state, onto the nuclear family (Mallet, 2004). This has led to the increased importance of home-ownership as a source of identity, status, and security in people’s lives (Depuis & Thorns, 1996). It has created a society that has grasped an understanding of home as positive social processes in a fixed, single place. As a place of attachment and rootedness, and a center of meaning and care (Cresswell, 2004), as an intimate place of rest and withdrawal, a place where people can feel a sense of control over space (Seamon, 1979) and a primal, reference space which frames peoples’ understandings of the outside world (Bachelard, 1994).

Alongside the way in which society understands home, the use of the words ‘place’, ‘space’ and the word ‘outside’ in the literature very much reiterates home being a single physical dwelling; a bounded place. Yet the following words of ‘care’, ‘rest’, and ‘control’ imply a more societal, human aspect. As the societal understanding of the meaning of home, the conflations are also in the literature.

When this may not be an intentional use of terminology, it recapitulates how problematic it is. These interpretations of home can have strong social and emotional impacts (Klodawsky, 2012) which raises some important critical considerations for some groups, including for the homeless group used in this review.

2.3: Homelessness and Home

To be used as an example and not as a generalisation, let’s consider the processes of becoming homeless for a young person. The normative version of becoming homeless is when a young person leaves the physical dwelling of which they reside. Before this point, a young person is not considered homeless. Yet, young people that become homeless by the normative vision often do because of a breakdown in relationship with their parents (Mallett et al, 2005). This is because of processes in ‘place’ that are directly dissimilar to that of care, of rest, of control which the human aspect of home involves. This contradicts the first evaluation of homelessness and implies that a young person can in fact be homeless before leaving the dwelling.

This example has highlighted a paradox and highlights the problems associated with the western understanding of home. If a young person can be homeless without leaving the physical dwelling, then is it correct to only label them as homeless after the ejection from the dwelling? And vice versa; can a young person have a ‘home’ without having a physical dwelling to reside? It’s important to disentangle the conflated understanding of home to begin to close the disparity in understanding of what constitutes home between individuals, groups, and institutions.

There are several authors that are addressing the homeless persons meaning of home (May, 2000; Klodawsky, 2012: Vandemark, 2007; Somerville, 1992 & 1997). Their findings are

9 consistently finding that the meanings of the homeless are entirely similar to those of their housed counterparts. Homeless people seek the human aspects of safety, security, control, and belonging (May, 2000). Yet, and this point is integral, these human aspects are not necessarily fixed in a single physical dwelling place. The homeless often find meanings of home in different forms of accommodation (May, 2000), i.e. hostels, supported housing, and friend’s homes. These can be individually at different times, or all together at the same time. This reduced significance of home as a particular, physical dwelling again raises the question of whether a person can be homeless even when being rehoused (Veness, 1992). The importance of recognising the loss of a home as a loss of belonging, as being ‘of the place’, rather than just ‘in place’ (May, 2000) is apparent.

2.4: Mobility and Home

The process of losing a home as a young person results in a life, or a period of time of fixed mobility (Jackson, 2015). With the fixed and increased mobility comes another challenge to the normative notion of home. The sedentary UK society feels threatened by mobility. Mobile lives are usually marginalised and bring up images of urban homelessness (Nowicka, 2007). Highly mobile people are seen as rootless, as lacking a bond to any place, and thus lacking a sense of care, comfort, and security from the ‘outside’ that are attributed to such place.

Not for one moment is this review suggesting the opposite of these beliefs is true, that homelessness is not a disturbing experience fraught with confrontations of understanding and wellbeing. It is however suggesting that without a bond to any particular place, there are still possibilities and cases where home is constructed and felt through alternative ways. Nowicka (2007) writes about what they refer to as ‘mobile locations’ in trans-national professional’s constructions of home. Though one accepts that transnational professionals and the young homeless seem almost entirely separated by circumstance and class, it should be recognised that higher than normal levels of mobility is something they have in common and some, albeit it careful, comparisons can be made. The author finds that the professionals have few problems constructing home even though they are described as ‘chronically mobile’ (p.1) and that home with these people are not fixed locations but a set of relationships with people and objects as part of repeated routines in different locations. Duyvendak (2011) touches on these findings and explains how highly mobile individuals employ ‘domesticating’ strategies to feel at home in different place and connect with the places they come across by acting out habits and connecting to people like themselves (p. 32). If ‘transnational professionals’ are capable of constructing home whist being chronically mobile, why would a ‘young intra-national nomad’ (a term one creates to highlight selective language and labelling of groups) not be able to? This challenges the juxtaposition of home and homelessness and also brings to light an ironic contradiction in western society. There is a belief that postmodern nomadism is a romantic ideal of total freedom (Braidotti, 1994) yet the young and homeless are excluded because of the normative vision of home. Jackson (2015) refers to imagined futures, precarious presents, and persistent pasts, and Heller (1995) claims that the increased mobility creates places where these three times in lives are unable to bond, resulting in people who live in the absolute present. This review argues that where this may be the case, there is also an opportunity to recognise that mobile people can find home and thus place in routines of practice and interactions. Thus being in the position to link these routines with a state of mind where

10 memories, myths, and stories can developed in people’s heads to establish place where the past, the present, and the future can meet and bond (Allan & Crew, 1989), just as those who have home in the normative vision.

2.5: Housing and Homelessness: Young People

Taking the emphasis away from homeless young people in particular for a moment. It has become widely recognised that since the financial crash of 2007/08, young people in general are finding it difficult to access owner-occupied housing. Banks are requiring larger mortgage deposits and the general employment situation of young people is far from good (Clapham et

al, 2013).

In Clapham’s (2013) study on the housing pathways of young people in the UK, he and his colleagues note that welfare benefit reforms (a recent change in policy has seen proposed changes to end housing support entitlement to eighteen to twenty one year olds), changes in housing related services such as hostels, foyers, and supported accommodation, and the availability of social housing are three overarching reasons for changing housing pathways of young people, which is resulting in increases of youth homelessness. Homeless Link, the countries national homelessness membership charity has reported that sixty eight percent of homelessness institutions have seen a rise in the number of young people accessing them over the period of one year (Homeless Link, 2015). In particular, one of the largest youth homelessness institutions, based in Birmingham, St Basils has seen a twenty five percent increase in the number of referrals of young people in one year (St Basils, 2016). It’s noted that once young people become homeless, these overarching reasons will almost certainly affect homeless young people the most (Jackson, 2015: Clapham et al, 2013).

The opportunities of ‘home’ for young people in the UK are thus changing and homelessness is on the rise. These processes are themselves are beginning to challenge the engrained normative vision of home in the western world. Yet still during these changing pathways, the evidence still states that housing policies are still favouring the homeownership sector.

Klodawsky discusses a point in their paper titled ‘Home and Homelessness’ (2012) that reiterates that having the normative meaning of home that the UK has creates a disparity in understanding between groups. The author discusses this in a more empirical sense and explains that the normative UK meaning of home and the focus of policy on home-ownership is limiting the range of options that are considered as solutions to create homes. Clapham and his colleagues (2013) state that this will lead to increased numbers of the young and homeless. Both authors suggest that policymakers and scholars alike need to acknowledge other options that may constitute home to supply a range of spaces and ‘social rules’ to help marginalised people achieve a sense of home.

How young people are experiencing the bias in housing policy and the housing market on a national scale is interesting. Young people are not only beginning to experience homelessness at the micro, single dwelling scale but they may also be experiencing homelessness as a group from their country. The group may be feeling less of security and control, and more of a sense of dislocation and exclusion from opportunities that other young people were able to access before them whilst being sold the normative version of home. A term called ‘asymmetrical citizenship’ (Carlen, 1996) describes this as “images of their own possible and impossible

11 existences are continuously and teasingly refracted back to them in multi-media representations of what it is to be poor and young” (Carlen, 1996, page 5).

These points explicitly imply that the focus of housing policy and provision on owner-occupation and the lack of consideration of other housing options as a result of this normative meaning of home enhances exclusionary effects on a multitude of scales. Not only from the material dwelling, nor from the human feelings of safety and care, but also from a sense of being excluded by the persons government. A sense of homelessness from the country of birth and residence?

2.6: Youth Homelessness Service Delivery

There is a common consensus in the literature that effective services should address the complex lives of young people and perform consistently with their experiences (Resnick & Burt, 1996). When the changing housing pathways of young people are resulting in more homeless, it’s important to think about what forms of support are available to these people in the light of the above processes in the UK. When this arrives in the form of a youth homelessness charity that can offer amongst other things one to one support and some form of dwelling, it’s in the interest of the changing outlook of home to examine how these services contribute to the young person’s meaning of home.

It’s widely recognised that due to the complexity and constraints in funding and policy, the youth homelessness service struggles to provide a truly effective and appropriate service to young people (Jackson, 2015: Heinze et al, 2010: Resnick & Burt, 1996). A lot of these problems can be explained by the effects of neo-liberalism. In the age of strict competition and figure based results, homeless services are now obliged to compete and deliver measurable outcomes to access funding (Jackson, 2015). To achieve this, services are required to fulfil criteria set out by the funding party that may not be considered of priority or wholly appropriate to the young person (Jackson, 2015). It’s also becoming a harder option to access funding from the state. Local authorities have continuously been making cuts to the Supporting People fund (Clapham et al, 2013). This is a fund which helps the homeless, the mentally ill, and victims of domestic abuse. This results in services shrinking and having to compete for potentially inappropriate funding whilst restricting the possibilities of what the service can offer young people.

Generally, young people prioritise the need for emotional and affirmational support (Stewart

et al, 2010) over material goods such as housing from services (Heinze et al, 2010). This

instantly raises questions of how this could be achieved whilst services are being developed in the image of neo-liberalism where housing is much easier to measure as a result than emotional development or support. It also strictly contradicts the aims of finding a home for young people. The literature is beginning to recognise that young people’s meaning of home should be addressed, but not in the disentangled way that I am suggesting. The literature talks about emotional and affirmational support, it talks about confidentiality, a private space, and a sense of security, yet it seemingly does not frame it in the same way as their housed counterparts. It adheres to the juxtaposition and fails to acknowledge that most of these human aspects could be projected in a way that suggests services do, or could, supply a home. Or at the very least an ‘almost home’ (Jackson, 2015).

12

2.7: Knowledge Gaps in the Research

This review has uncovered a number of gaps, or if not gaps, some form of problematic methodological or language approach in the literature around the meaning of home, young people, and service delivery. First of all is a concerted acknowledgement of the problematic approach of conflating the words house and home in the western, specifically UK context. The literature could go further in acknowledging that home is more fluid and complex than they articulate and could benefit from a critically aware approach to addressing home.

Secondly, the literature lacks an approach which addresses perhaps the single most important aspect of being homeless; finding a ‘home’ and not a house. Policy and support focus on housing as a priority. This is of course important as everyone should have a roof over their head, yet commonly young people are not seeking a house as a priority. It’s important to take an approach that recognises that young homeless people are seeking the more emotional, affirmational support that many others also seek as a priority and that this should share the spot light with finding a house in their journey through and out of homelessness.

Finally, this is a great opportunity for literature to explore youth homelessness institutions in a way that combines the critical acknowledgment of the meanings of home with an awareness that homeless people can and do seek and construct home in various ways and settings. This will help to establish how services may already be supplying forms of home or pinpoint opportunities where they could. Bringing out the juxtaposition and instead bridging the gap between home and homelessness, through the lens of young homeless people will encourage two branches of literature to begin productive conversation. There is a hope that this can initiate a far reaching understanding of the meanings of home of young homeless people. That this will result in the de-marginalisation of them and encourage a larger scale, societal shift in understanding and opinion. Whilst this may seem like an ambitious pipe dream, there are more short term, actionable implications. It could encourage homelessness institutions along with policy makers to create holistic, purpose built support and bring a focus on supplying more suitable options for young people to experience home.

2.8: Conclusion

This review has challenged the juxtaposition of home and homeless in the UK has begun to bring together the idea that young homeless, and commonly highly mobile people are very much wanting and needing the same experiences and constructions of home as their housed counterparts. By first establishing a normative meaning of home has been developed and reinforced through society, policy, and the literature, this review has revealed the problematic consequences incurred by the conflation of home and house. The disparity in understanding of the meanings of home between the highly mobile homeless and the sedentary housed has created an automatic focus on owner-occupation in policy and also the access to a physical dwelling as a measurement of homelessness. The focus on home-ownership has resulted in a very real lack of housing options for young people in the housing market, and the access to housing as a measurement of homelessness has resulted in missed opportunities of other support. In essence, literature and policy is focussing on the negative plight that the young homeless people are in and are missing opportunities where homelessness could be understood in a way that can recognise that young homeless people are able to construct home in different

13 ways, as well as find home in various settings; in a place or a set of circumstances to which they have control over. It’s understood that to supply them with a house in the age of neo-liberalism is becoming more difficult, and to recognise that young people can find and construct home in various settings could support policy and thus institutions to create and support alternative and perhaps more appropriate support, to deliver more experiences of ‘home’ for homeless young people.

14

3.0: Methodology 3.1: Research Approach

Challenging the normative vision of home and the juxtaposition of home and homelessness in the UK using the experience of the young and homeless, I feel, is an endeavour that requires the voice of those I wish to express. Using a qualitative case study, I will disentangle the concept of home into the lived experiences of home, or the sense of home, and the more symbolic and identifying meaning of home to build an understanding of what a home is and means to a young homeless person in the UK today.

I will build an understanding of how an integral and successful youth homelessness charity institution, that supports the young and homeless, seek to provide a sense of home and how the young people are receiving and being shaped by the services the charity offer.

3.1.A: Research Questions

How does a homelessness charity institution contribute to a sense and meaning of home to young homeless people?

To fully answer this question, it will be subdivided into the following sub-questions: 1. How does the charity institution intend to provide a sense of home?

2. Where and when are young people experiencing a sense of home?

3. How do young people receive this and thus how do they experience a sense of home at the charity institution?

4. How have young people’s meaning of home been shaped by their time and experiences at the charity institution?

3.2: Case Study

As my intention is to provide thick description of experiences and meaning of home of young homeless people by providing knowledge through their own eyes and polyphony of voices (Cloke et al, 2000) I planned to gain access to a charity institution that works with young people who are or at risk of homelessness in an important urban area. The charity in mind is called St Basils and it is based in Birmingham, UK (see Figure 1).

St Basils is one of the leading youth homelessness charities in the country, supporting over five thousand young people last year (St Basils, 2016) in a city that has seen a year on year rise in its homeless population. Its approach is to work with young people, and I stress the word with because they emphasise that they do not tell the young people what to do, or do for them, but rather to work with them to support the development of their life, education, work, and training skills. This is with the end goal of helping young people move on from homelessness to successful independent living with little chance of regression into homelessness again. St Basils is also a national leader in a scheme named Psychologically Informed Environments (PIE), which focuses on St Basils being psychologically aware and able to meet the emotional and psychological needs of the young people. In line with this approach, St Basils is the national

15 facilitator of the young homeless voice, organising the annual Youth Homeless Parliament which involves a group of young people from around the country attending parliament and discussing key issues that affect young people with ministers (Youth Homeless Parliament, N.D).

Figure 1: (created with: GIS ArcMap) Street Map of Birmingham City Centre with locations of Head Office, Conybere Gardens, and Edmonds Court.

Birmingham is the UK’s second most populated city after London and is the first city to achieve a ‘whole city sign up’ committed to ending youth homelessness (St Basils, 2014). Though this information could result in one assuming the city is therefore more effective at preventing or tackling homelessness in general, this is not the case. The city has seen a four hundred per cent rise in the number of rough sleepers from 2010 to 2015 (Gentleman, 2016), and St Basils alone has seen a twenty-five per cent rise in the number of referrals of young people from 2014 to 2015 (St Basils, 2016). It’s important to recognise that these figures are developing during a time of sharp cuts to funds that support homelessness prevention and support, for example, the currently most recent proposed cut of five million pounds from the supporting peoples fund, which is set up to help organisations that support victims of domestic abuse, and those that experience homelessness (Birmingham Mail, 2017).

16

3.3: Access

For research with a vulnerable group such as young homeless people to be possible and successfully completed, there is a large emphasis on how one will come into access to the group. In this particular case, as the research subjects are vulnerable young people, there are many questions to answer in regard to what the research is, why it is being done, if there are there any potential negative impacts on the young people, and what the benefits of the research are for the young people.

To access St Basils, the process involved initially getting into contact with the relevant member of staff at the charity, who fortunately has been a long-term contact. After several conversations over a few months about the research and what it would entail, conditional access was granted. The access was granted because the charity was not only interested in the research questions and research approach, but also because of my positionality as an ex-homeless young person who was in receipt of the same charity’s services.

The conditions of full access to the young people were that I would have to apply and be physically in receipt of a successful and clear DBS (Disclosure and Barring Service) check, read, understand, and sign Data Protection and Safeguarding Policy documents, complete adequate information and checklist sheets (see Appendices D & E), and finally allow a member of staff to examine the young person interview item list for any potential harmful questions. Unfortunately, although the policy document, the information and checklists, and the examination of the item list conditions were all a success, the integral condition of physically being in receipt of a clear DBS check was not fulfilled. This initially caused a bit of a panic and it was thought that it would end the research plans in their tracks. However, a compromise was found. Access could still be granted, but there would have to be a member of charity staff present with me at all times when around the young people.

Although this would have consequences for my research approaches, the access was still granted and there were no further potentially research threatening access issues. The requirements to gain access to such a charity highlights the difficulty in successfully gaining contact with vulnerable groups. I was made aware by a member of staff that not many researchers are granted access and that my positionality was of great benefit to me being accepted.

3.4: Ethics

In the design of the research there were strong ethical considerations. There was to be an awareness of my role as a researcher to the young people (Cloke et al, 2000), my ability to listen rather than to demand (Jackson, 2015), and most importantly my reflexivity in my methods. I planned to be able to adapt away from the traditional sit down, office space, demanding interviewer approach and take more of a consequentialist approach, resulting in improved confidential privacy and sensitivity to gender and cultural differences. This reflexivity in practice, however, was compromised entirely by the failure of delivery of the DBS check. As a member of charity staff had to be present during the interviews with the young people, it meant that full privacy was sacrificed, and the ability to adapt away from the office interview setting was impossible.

17 The presence of a third person unfortunately resulted in minor examples of the young people feeling uncomfortable and less open with their answering than I had hoped, potentially resulting in a reduction of rich data. However, I reiterate that the effects were minor. St Basils has a method of employing members of staff that have a certain positionality to the young people. Many of the staff are either young, or most importantly have themselves experienced homelessness or another form of pressing social experience. This positionality helps them work and relate with the young people and thus had less of a formal effect on my research than I had feared. The rest of the considerations were implemented to a degree of success. I ensured that my positionality was explained before we entered the interview setting and I ensured that the young person had the opportunity to tell me a little bit about themselves and ask me questions both before and after the interviews. This was to ensure that they did not see me as a demanding researcher that is out of touch with their lives, but rather as a fellow young person that has had similar experiences and is willing to listen to their stories. This was successful throughout the fieldwork and resulted in young people being relatively calm and informal with me, as well as being intrigued by my own journey since being homeless.

As in the ethical planning of the research (Cloke et al, 2000), the charity requested that an information sheet be completed and specifically requested information regarding safeguarding be included in both the information sheet and the written consent form (See Appendix D & E). These documents also included information of what the research is all about, why it is being done, what the participant will expect from taking part, disclosure of full confidentiality and anonymity, advantages and disadvantages of taking part, and the right to withdraw.

Not ignoring the ethical considerations towards the staff members that I also interviewed, the same processes were implemented, along with the reflexivity methods. As I was not in need of the DBS to interview the staff, it was possible for them to take control over where we held the interview and in what form. This resulted in one interview being held outside in a benched area, and another one being held in a local café whilst the other two were held in the office.

3.5: Positionality

My position to the charity and the participants is unique. When I was eighteen I had a relationship breakdown with my family which happened to be the beginning of my own experiences and journey through youth homelessness. During this time, I accessed St Basils and was in use of their various services. They helped me get to the point where I am at this moment in my life. Following on from this experience, I also took the opportunity to complete my bachelor’s degree research with them so I already have professional and academic experience with the charity. It’s always been my intention through my studies to give something back and to give a voice to an ever more marginalised group in the UK.

To understand where I have come from contextualises my research interest. It goes some way to explain my intentions, as well as my interpretations of information from my respondents (Cloke et al, 2000). I’m acutely aware that I have a strong emotional attachment to my research, the charity institution, and the young people, but I’m also of a strong understanding that my own experiences and opinions should not be projected in a way that will create biased information.

18 I have no doubt that this position was integral to the access to the charity and the level of success in the recruitment and overall research process. I have been in contact with one of the management team since I completed my bachelor’s degree, whom happened to be one of the very same managers during my time as a service user. I was told that there would be no problems at all accommodating my research, although I was also told that only a few researchers are granted access, highlighting the importance of my positionality in being granted this access.

My positionality was always one of the first topics of conversation when I was meeting new people. When I was introduced by my research assistants to other colleagues, my homelessness history would be mentioned and it was as if this was a passage of respect. These colleagues would express interest and admiration both visibly and audibly and it seemed to grant me a more personal, informal level of communication than I may have had otherwise. This also translated into many of the interview and focus group settings. Once I explained who I was, where I came from, and my experiences of youth homelessness, I felt treated as one of them. I mean this in the truest sense and I believe this positionality allowed me to overcome some of the ethical issues caused by the lack of the DBS check, to essentially shortcut my way into a more comfortable and open environment with the young people.

3.6: Concept Definitions

Home:

A variety of lived personal and social processes including but not limited to security, control, rest, and withdrawal, alongside but not integrally attached to a bounded space. (Adapted using Kidd & Evans, 2011; Mallett, 2004, & Oxford English Dictionary, 2007).

Homeless:

As I will be accessing a homelessness institution in the UK context. I will be defining homeless using the statutory homeless definition provided by the government. Which is a person that has no access to assured accommodation in the UK, to live with family or alone, if there is a risk of violence in their accommodation, or if their accommodation is in disrepair. They also must have a local county connection (Department for Communities and Local Government, 2016). Although I am aware that this contradicts the definition of home, it’s important to identify the homeless as defined by the location.

Young People:

Defined as persons between the ages of 16 and 25.

Homelessness Charity Institution: St Basils, Birmingham.

Specifically defined as a charity that works with young people who are or at risk of homelessness. (St Basils, 2016).

19

3.7: Research Methods

I proposed to use primary qualitative, exploratory mixed research methods. Understanding personal viewpoints, experiences, and meanings of home in young people is the focus of the research and the most appropriate methods of research was chosen to be one to one in-depth interviews and focus groups with the young people. Alongside this, there was a secondary focus on understanding how the charity contributes to these viewpoints and meanings through their service delivery and to use this data as cross reference material to further understand the information shared by the young people. One to one interviews and focus groups with members of staff were also deemed the most appropriate method of establishing this outcome.

It’s important to recognise that the use of qualitative techniques in this research context is embracing the interpretivist and constructionist (Bryman, 2008) nature of qualitative research. To provide thick description to the meanings and experiences of homeless young people and to provide knowledge through their eyes and polyphony of voices (Cloke et al, 2000).

The nature of my research methods was planned to be ethnographical. I intended on engaging with the lives of the young people over a period of time at the institution (Davies, 2008) whilst offering my time as a volunteer to the project or projects that I would be present at. This would have given me the opportunity to develop a rapport with the young people and the staff and grant opportunities to log observations in a field diary.

Due to the overall and lack of time on site and the fact that I was to be based away from projects, at the head office (see figures 1 & 2), I was unable to offer my time as a volunteer and thus engage with the young people’s lives, develop a more longitudinal and natural rapport, and log observations in a field diary.

Figure 2: Youth Hub and Head Office of St Basils. The name is taken from the church that the service began in, in 1971.

20 3.7.A: Qualitative Interviews

The method of interviews was to explore young people’s senses of home (see appendix A & B for the interview guides), the intended sense of home that the charity institution would like to provide, and how the young people receive this. Specifically, the interviews contributed to addressing sub research questions one, two, and three.

The interviews were conducted in two groups. Firstly, I was to focus on the young people and then the staff. Concerning both groups of interviews and to develop a standard of quality, I had originally planned to participate in the everyday experiences and running of the charity. To develop a rapport with the young people and the staff. I planned to give both groups as much control over the interview experiences as possible including the setting and the timing, as well as the flow of the interview by focusing on listening rather than demanding (Jackson, 2015), resulting in a non-hierarchal experience with a focus on reciprocity on my part. Factors that are deemed extremely important in the process of interviewing vulnerable groups (Bryman, 2008: Cloke et al, 2000).

Qualitative Interviews: Young People

The interviews with the young people were a little more challenging than planned. These had to be held in office space and because it was impossible to perform the interview spontaneously due to the fact my research base was away from the young people at the charities head office. I was to hold interviews at three locations; Head Office, Conybere Gardens, and Edmonds Court (see Figure 1).

Around thirty percent of the young people either cancelled or did not show up in the first instance. For example, the first day of interview at the project Conybere Gardens (see Figures 1 & 3), just a short five-minute car trip from the head office resulted in none of the originally organised respondents attending. Instead I attended the project throughout the day and interviewed young people that were on site and interested in the research.

21 This first day resulted in two, shorter than expected interviews with challenges of rapport, responsiveness to the questions in the interview, and the overall quality of data collected. I strongly believe that this is related to the ethics considerations mentioned and perhaps the lack of awareness of the interview beforehand. However, throughout the rest of the fieldwork, the rest of the young people attended and the general responsiveness and rapport was much better. I believe this partly also had to do with my own interviewing skills and growing experience over the research period.

Recruitment, Sampling, and Overview of Respondents: Young People

The original design method of recruiting the young people was tied into the ethnographic nature of the research. I was to spend most of the time at the projects, developing a rapport, and then selecting young people with a focus on recruiting a mix of genders, ages, and ethnicities as well as young people with different experiences. There was initially the potential issue of sampling bias where I may have made subconscious decisions based on my own research and personal interests, or subconscious decisions based on gender or ethnicity.

However, the recruitment of the young people was allocated to one of my research assistants because of time and DBS constraints. I did make the assistant aware of the above considerations and that it would be ideal for a mix of respondents. This resulted in a generally good mix of gender, age, and ethnicity in my respondents (see Table 1). I am aware however that most of the young people were chosen to take part because there was an understanding that they would be more responsive and willing to take part and openly discuss the subject, which raises questions of bias regarding hearing stories from those that actively tell their stories more often. This may have resulted in some data being data that has been almost rehearsed a number of times. These young people may have spoken about similar topics with others, which results in less raw data. The demographic information for the completed interviews can be found in Table 1.

22 Of the thirteen young people that were asked to participate, ten accepted, and eight completed the interviews. Two others were recruited on location at Conybere Gardens after two of the accepted young people failed to attend the interview.

Qualitative Interviews: Staff

The staff interviews were completed with all of the ethical and methodical considerations in mind. I could implement the reflexive approach to the setting and timing because I was not in need of a DBS to interview the staff members. This meant even though each of the staff interviews were pre-organised, as the staff members were also based at the Head Office (see Figure 1), we could be flexible with the times to suit them. Two out of four were held in interview offices, and the other two were held away from the office, one in a garden area, and another over a cup of coffee in a local café.

The reflexivity in the method, conversation around my positionality, as well as my focus on listening and reciprocity translated to some very good rapport with the staff, with each of them responding to the questions in an open and proactive manner. I felt as though each of the members of staff were confident and revealing in their answers with little hesitation or perceived holding back of content.

Table 1: Young people’s background characteristics Respondents Young People Gender Male 5 Female 5 Age (Years) 16 - 18 6 19 – 21 3 22 – 24 1 Ethnicity White British 4 Black British 3

White South African 1

Black Zimbabwean 1

Location

Head Office 4

Conybere Gardens 3

23

Recruitment, Sampling, and Overview of Respondents: Staff

The charity institution staff were recruited based on the length of employment, their first-hand experience with young people, and the relevance of their position to the research. As there was an over representation of women as staff at the charity, there was unfortunately no men interviewed. Every member of staff interviewed had at least one year of experience, going up to seventeen years. The two most appropriate and relevant positions to interview were the National Youth Engagement team whom collectively have nineteen years’ experience ranging from one to one support work to the current national engagement work, and the Like Skills team whom collectively have eighteen years’ experience ranging from one to one support, to the current life skills work (see Table 2). Chapter four contains a more detailed description of the roles that the staff fulfil at St Basils. Interestingly, as mentioned, each respondent had an almost identical positionality to me in that they have either experienced homelessness, or some sort of traumatic experience that is relevant to St Basils. This positionality results in the staff understanding and relating to the position of the young people perhaps more so than others might. This means the staff structure their approaches of the way they work with the young people to be sensitive and aware of the young people’s lives. This is discussed more in chapter four.

3.7.B: Focus Groups

The inclusion of focus groups in the research is intended to establish the meaning of home. It would provide an opportunity for the young people to develop their thoughts and opinions of what home means as a group; the identity, the symbolism, the environment, the collective memory (See Appendix C for focus group guide). Specifically, the focus groups were to address sub research question four. The focus groups are also a method to engage the group in a further enhanced, and alternative scope to the individual interviews. The group discussion is more like the development of thoughts in everyday life which is deemed more naturalistic, resulting in truer to life ideas (Bryman, 2008).

In conversation with Emma Jackson, a professor of Sociology at Goldsmiths University who wrote the award winning ethnographic book Young Homeless People and Urban Space: Fixed

in Mobility (2015), it was recommended that although I should attempt to organise focus groups

in advance, I should also be open to organising impromptu, spontaneous focus groups. Young homeless people live precarious lives which results in planning and attending appointments being difficult. With this consideration in mind, although the ideal group size is six to ten people (Bryman, 2008), I was seeking a minimum of four people per group and two or three groups.

The practicalities of the focus groups during the research was more difficult than planned. Where I intended to plan groups but also be open to impromptu ones, the only option available was to plan. As I was based in the head office, away from the projects, it was impossible to spontaneously hold a focus group and although I did attempt to organise three focus groups, because of time constraints and the issue of the attendance of young people, I managed to organise just one focus group, of three people held at the Head Office.

This focus group itself was successful. I took a discussion facilitator role, encouraging the young people to put forward their opinions and to also challenge in a respectful and

24 constructive manner. I ensured that my contribution to the discussion was to encourage and lead the discussion without influencing the overall outcome.

Recruitment, Sampling, and Overview of Respondents: Focus Group

The main considerations for the focus group was to ensure that they had a balance of gender, age, and ethnicity (See Table 3) to ensure a balanced and collective discussion. Due to the time and DBS constraints, the young people chosen to complete the focus group were some the young people that completed the interviews.

The group was made up of one male and two females between the ages of nineteen and twenty-one. The ethnicities of the group were white south African, black Zimbabwean, and one non-stated. The focus group was held at the Head Office.

3.7.C: Field Notes

There was a planned method of maintaining an ongoing and detailed field diary and recordings throughout the research. The method was intended to observe and reflect on the use of space in the charity and how this contributes to the experiences and meaning of home, and to also to use as cross-referencing material for the interviews. It would have developed a more detailed research and granted an opportunity for me to reflect on ethical considerations and the effects of my own positionality (Cloke et al, 2000) The design was to take regular, small time outs to complete the notes, importantly away from respondents as to not induce self-consciousness amongst them (Bryman, 2008).

Due to only accessing space which young people and staff were using on two short occasions at Conybere Gardens and Edmonds Court, I was unfortunately only able to complete a small number of observational recordings. I was unable to experience the use of space over a longer period of days or weeks, mainly down to DBS induced organisational issues. Where I was not able to establish the contribution of the use of space, I was able to make a small number of observations on the space I had access to. This involved the general layout, the decoration, the intended use of the space. I also successfully reflected on ethical, positionality, and interviewing considerations.

3.8: Analysis of Research Findings

The analysis was planned to take a grounded theory approach of systematically gathering and analysing the data through the research process (Bryman, 2008). This would have allowed me to maintain focus, and to recognise opportunity for further probing. The early transcribing and coding, in practice, was partly realised, due to organisational limitations and the short overall time of the fieldwork. Where there was a continuous process of interviewing and transcribing throughout the fieldwork, allowing me to reflect on my own interviewing techniques and to highlight opportunities of probing or expansion of questions, unfortunately the level of analysis was not any more developed than establishing preliminary findings.

25 Post-fieldwork I have been completing narrative analysis through the process of thematic coding. Taking the process of segmenting and reassembling the data with a focus on the constant comparison and theoretical sensitivity to the data (Boeije, 2010), I established the main themes and patterns of the data, as well as the similarities and differences between the data of the young people and the staff to build a quality understanding of the experience and shaping of home in the charity setting.

This process continued throughout the data from the young people, through the staff, to the focus group to construct a theoretical approach to answering the research questions. I have however had an awareness that there may be a loss of context and narrative flow given the nature of fragmenting and coding data (Bryman, 2008). Also, the analysis will be almost certainly be under the threat of objectivism by myself which may influence the way the stories are received in the finished product (Bryman, 2008).

26

4.0: Service Delivery and the Experience of Home

This chapter will introduce the context for the service delivery at St Basils. It will explore some of the services at the charity in detail, and build an understanding of how the charity works with and understands the lives of the young people, establishing how the staff believe the outcomes of the services and the charity intends to provide a sense, experiences of home for the young people.

4.1: The Staff at St Basils

To begin to know how a homelessness charity contributes to the senses and meaning of home of young homeless people, we should understand what the charity offers in the form of its services and its staff. The charity’s staff that were included in this research were chosen specifically as a good representation of St Basils. To illustrate, I will describe the four respondents; Brenda, Tamzin, Magenta, and Beyoncé.

Brenda has been working at the charity for two years and has had most of her experience supporting young people on a one to one, support worker level. Her current role is to:

“work with young people across the country to help them develop policy and pathway

plans and programs and conferences in companies that work with young people that are homeless”

Tamzin is the most experienced member of staff included in this research. She has had seventeen years of service at the charity, beginning with support work before playing an integral role in the development of the charity’s various Youth Boards, including the National Youth Reference Group and her current role as National Youth Engagement Manager. Magenta is an experienced, senior member of staff with seven years extensive experience as a support worker and with the Learning, Skills, and Work service. She is based at the projects1 so has contact with the young people on a daily basis. She explains how the core part of her role is to facilitate:

“EET (Employment, Education, and Training) for the ages of 16 to 25. It is to enable

them into any area where they can progress into their education or their career, or training to upskill them”

This is to highlight and support the needs of the young people in areas such as welfare benefits and mental health to ensure any needs that may affect a young person’s ability to enrol in Employment, Education, or Training are addressed.

1_{St Basils actively uses the term project instead of hostel because of the stereotypes associated with a hostel. It}

27 Beyoncé has been with the charity for eleven years and has experience in St Basils Life Skills service and support work. Beyoncé’s positionality to the young people brings about an understanding of the young people that she applies to her role. The core of her role is to:

“…support the staff rather than run the workshops. My job is to create booklets and

resources for the young people”

She applies her understanding of the young people to her role by creating resources of different working styles. She has a personal interest of focusing less on the ‘normal budgeting etc’ and more on issues such as ‘sexual grooming and exploitation, healthy relationships’ that are currently not in the Life Skills programme.

4.2: The Services and Aims at St Basils

St Basils emphasises that it works with young people, aged 16 to 25, who are homeless or at risk of homelessness and has a range of prevention, accommodation, and support services to help young people gain stability, skills, training, and employment with the official aim of helping them successfully move on from homelessness without the risk of returning (St Basils, 2017). The staff articulate the main aim of the charity as:

“Our main aim is to get them into their own flats, so they can look after themselves and

keep a flat” – Brenda.

“Our job is to enable them to find a keep a home, but also to stay on their tenancy” – Beyoncé

Included in this range of prevention, accommodation, and support services are the main core services; key support work, life skills (Learning, Skills, and Work), and youth engagement.

“We don’t just house. It’s not to get a young person a house or a home and leave them

to it. It’s about all the other stuff that’s wrapped around that young person… …It’s our job to ensure that a young person sees and believes that they can achieve and aspire to be anything… …We house, we support, we educate, we engage” - Tamzin

“We will support… because that’s literally what we’re about. …We just want to be able to support people and help them walk on their own” – Magenta

28 4.2.A: Key Support Work

The key support work is one of the most integral part of St Basils service to young people. A key worker is a single member of staff that gets allocated to a young person through their time at St Basils and together they have weekly or monthly sessions to discuss and work through any support that the young people want or need. This can include anything from a general conversation about the young person’s life to other focused support around benefits, applications, and housing.

4.2.B: Life Skills

The life skills programme is part of the larger Learning, Skill, and Work service. It is a nationally recognised Open College Network (OCN) Level 1 award in Progression Programme that consists of young people choosing three modules from a choice of fifteen that are developed to improve a young person’s ability to live independently, budget, eat healthily, and build a career portfolio, amongst others (St Basils, 2017). This programme is also an integral part of St Basils service to young people and is a mandatory requirement if they are to move on to certain forms of accommodation, namely social housing. As Beyonce states:

“One of the things that the council ask for is if they have attended a life skills program. This

will support them to move into their own accommodation, to independence”

4.2.C: Youth Engagement

The youth engagement service manifests itself in several ways. St Basils claims that youth engagement is integrated in all its services. It emphasises that working with young people and not for them is essential to the success of service at St Basils. So, encouraging young people to take an active engaged role in the service they receive is constant. There are also specific youth engagement services aimed at the higher level of engagement, namely the National Youth Engagement. Taking part in these services is not mandatory and they are usually taken up by the young people that are showing great participation in the other services and have a strong level of engagement generally. These services are aimed at further reaching, organisational, or even national scale schemes such as the running of the organisation or participation in the national youth parliament.

4.3: Service Approaches, Positionality, and Relationships with Young People.

Of the five thousand young people that were referred to St Basils in 2015 - 2016, over one thousand and two hundred were housed in the various projects of St Basils throughout their support period (St Basils, 2017). This means that for a period, the projects of St Basils are the young person’s dwelling. There are two types of project dwelling for the young people; direct access, and semi-independent. The main differences between the projects are that direct access has staff present twenty-four hours a day and the young people share a kitchen and bathroom whereas the semi-independent dwellings have staff present during daylight hours only and the