People in Short-Term Or Emergency Accommodation: a Profile of Specialist Homelessness Services Clients

People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients

People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare is a major national agency whose purpose is to create authoritative and accessible information and statistics that inform decisions and improve the health and welfare of all Australians.

This product, excluding the AIHW logo, Commonwealth Coat of Arms and any material owned by a third party or protected by a trademark, has been released under a Creative Commons BY 3.0 (CC BY 3.0) licence. Excluded material owned by third parties may include, for example, design and layout, images obtained under licence from third parties and signatures. We have made all reasonable efforts to identify and label material owned by third parties. You may distribute, remix and build upon this work. However, you must attribute the AIHW as the copyright holder of the work in compliance with our attribution policy available at . The full terms and conditions of this licence are available at .

ISBN 978-1-76054-488-1 (PDF) ISBN 978-1-76054-489-8 (Print)

Suggested citation Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2019. People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients. Cat. no. HOU 300. Canberra: AIHW.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Board Chair Mrs Louise Markus Chief Executive Officer Mr Barry Sandison

Any enquiries about or comments on this publication should be directed to: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare GPO Box 570 Canberra ACT 2601 Tel: (02) 6244 1000 Email: [email protected]

Published by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.

Please note that there is the potential for minor revisions of data in this report. Please check the online version at for any amendments. Contents

Summary...... v

1 Introduction...... 1 Defining homelessness...... 1 What is short-term or emergency accommodation?...... 2 Profile of clients in short-term or emergency accommodation seeking SHS...... 3 Different types of clients in short-term or emergency accommodation...... 6 How do people become homeless?...... 7 How do people exit homelessness?...... 8

2 Who seeks help for homelessness?...... 9 Who is in short-term or emergency accommodation?...... 9 Key comparative findings...... 12

3 Persistent service users...... 16 Who are persistent service users?...... 16 Why did persistent service users seek assistance?...... 18 What services did persistent service users need?...... 23 What services were provided to persistent service users?...... 25 What are the gaps in service provision?...... 27 How do persistent service users engage with services?...... 28 What are the housing outcomes for persistent service users?...... 33 What does this tell us?...... 35

4 Service cyclers...... 37 Who are service cyclers?...... 37 Why did service cyclers seek assistance?...... 39 What services did service cyclers need?...... 44 What services were provided to service cyclers?...... 45 What are the gaps in service provision?...... 48 How do service cyclers engage with services?...... 50 What are the housing outcomes for service cyclers?...... 54 What does this tell us?...... 56

People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients iii 5 Transitory service users...... 58 Who are transitory service users?...... 58 Why did transitory service users seek assistance?...... 60 What services did transitory service users need?...... 64 What services were provided to transitory service users?...... 66 What are the gaps in service provision?...... 68 How do transitory service users engage with services?...... 69 What are the housing outcomes for transitory service users?...... 71 What does this tell us?...... 73

Appendix A: Background information...... 75 Preliminary results...... 75 Background to the Housing Journeys project...... 75 Defining homelessness...... 75 Exiting homelessness...... 77 Housing First...... 78 Data...... 78 Scope of the Housing Journeys project...... 79 Aims of the Housing Journeys project...... 79

Appendix B: Technical information...... 80 Scope and coverage...... 80 Data quality and Indigenous Australians...... 81 Incomplete data...... 81 Key data quality issues, 2011–12...... 81

Acknowledgments...... 82

Abbreviations...... 83

References...... 84

List of tables...... 86

List of figures...... 87

Related publications...... 89

iv People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients Summary

On Census night in 2016, around 21,200 Australians were in supported accommodation for the homeless (ABS 2018)—living in hostels for the homeless, night shelters, or refuges. This number has increased over the past decade, from around 17,300 in supported accommodation for the homeless in the 2006 Census. These estimates, derived from the Census, are likely to underestimate the extent of homelessness, and there are no data available to determine the magnitude of the underestimation (ABS 2018).

This report presents, for the first time, a comprehensive analysis of people experiencing homelessness in Australia living in short-term or emergency accommodation, over a 4 year period, using the Specialist Homelessness Services Collection (SHSC).

Those in short-term or emergency accommodation were more likely to be female, aged 15–34, not in the labour force and present alone As a group, the 20,400 clients in short-term or emergency accommodation who sought the assistance of specialist homelessness services (SHS) upon their first presentation to services in 2011–12, had different demographic characteristics to all other adult SHS clients (136,200). More than half (54% or 11,000) were female compared with 63% (85,800) of other SHS clients; almost half (48% or 9,700) reported they were living alone, compared with 36% (36,900) of other SHS clients, and most (92% or 17,700) were unemployed or not in the labour force, compared with 87% (82,300) of other SHS clients.

Analysis of the service use patterns of clients in short-term or emergency accommodation in 2011–12 revealed 3 cohorts • Persistent service users: 2,900 clients (or 14% of clients in short-term or emergency accommodation) accessed services every financial year from 2011–12 to 2014–15.

• Service cyclers: 8,800 clients (or 43% of clients in short-term or emergency accommodation) accessed services in 2 or 3 years of the 4-year period.

• Transitory service users: 8,700 clients (or 43% of clients in short-term or emergency accommodation) accessed services in 2011–12 only.

Service use increases with increasingly complex needs Those in short-term or emergency accommodation showed increasing service use according to their needs or ‘vulnerability conditions’. In this analysis, vulnerability is based on whether someone had ever reported: a mental health issue, problematic drug and/or alcohol use, and/or domestic or family violence.

Persistent service users had the most complex needs of all cohorts. Almost 3 in 4 (74%) reported a mental health issue, while almost two-thirds (62%) reported at least 2 of the 3 vulnerability conditions.

More than half (54%) of service cyclers reported a mental health issue, while 2 in 5 (40%) reported at least 2 of the 3 vulnerability conditions.

Transitory service users were the least likely to report experiencing mental health issues, domestic or family violence and/or problematic drug and/or alcohol use. Less than 1 in 5 (17%) reported at least 2 out of 3 vulnerability conditions.

People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients v People in short-term or emergency accommodation most frequently seek accommodation and financial services Accommodation and financial services were most commonly sought by all 3 cohorts in short-term or emergency accommodation. Younger clients (aged 15–24) in general were more likely than older clients (aged 50 and over) to seek these services.

Those in short-term or emergency accommodation also sought assistance with interpersonal relationships—particularly domestic and family violence. Across all 3 groups of those in short-term or emergency accommodation, females were around 5 times more likely than males to seek assistance with domestic and family violence.

People already in short-term or emergency accommodation were likely to keep receiving it when needed In this study, all clients first presented to specialist homelessness services in short-term or emergency accommodation. Of these clients, almost 6 in 10 (58%) indicated a need to receive short-term or emergency accommodation. Of these clients with a continued need for this kind of accommodation provision, short-term or emergency accommodation was provided to almost 4 in 5 (79%). Only 1 in 10 (11%) who needed additional short-term or emergency accommodation were not provided or referred to another agency for this service.

Many of those in short-term or emergency accommodation experience positive outcomes following SHS support Clients in short-term or emergency accommodation approaching SHS agencies for assistance are by definition homeless. Following support around 35% were housed: ranging from 22% of transitory service users to 44% of both persistent service users and service cyclers. Housing outcomes for 1 in 5 (18%) clients were unknown.

• Almost 6 in 10 (59%) persistent service users had repeat periods of homelessness during the 4 years (that is, transitioned from homeless to housed and then to homeless again). Almost half (44%) were housed at the end of support. For more than 1 in 10 (12%) persistent service users accessing support across the 4 years, their housing outcome was unknown.

• Around one-quarter (26%) of service cyclers also experienced repeat episodes of homelessness and almost half (44%) were housed at the end of the study period. For more than 1 in 5 (21%) service cyclers their housing outcome was unknown.

• While only 3% of transitory service users experienced repeat homelessness during their engagement with SHS, more than 1 in 5 (22%) were housed at the end of their support. The housing outcomes for around 1 in 5 (18%) transitory service users was unknown.

Linking data sets could provide more comprehensive information This analysis reports only on clients accessing services from SHS agencies, and not all of those in short-term or emergency accommodation. It also only reports on findings to 30 June 2015. Linking this data to other sources—for example, information on rent assistance, income support, or social housing—would provide more comprehensive information on a client’s circumstances, journey and outcomes, to better inform service responses. In addition, further work on identifying and improving the estimation of homelessness is required to facilitate transparent and reliable measures that will inform effective policy and service responses.

vi People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients 1 Introduction

Many Australians experience events in their lives that may place them at risk of homelessness. On Census night in 2016, more than 116,400 men, women and children in Australia were homeless (ABS 2018). Of these, an estimated 21,200 (18%) were in ‘supported accommodation for the homeless’—that is, they were living in hostels for the homeless, night shelters, or refuges. 1 This is similar to the 2011 Census estimate (21,300 people), and an increase from the 2006 Census estimate (17,300 people) (ABS 2018).

The Specialist Homelessness Services Collection (SHSC) considers people in short-term or emergency accommodation to be experiencing homelessness (AIHW 2017). Introduction Defining homelessness There is no universally agreed definition of homelessness. For example, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) defines it as a lack of 1 or more of the elements that represent home—which may include a sense of security, stability, privacy, safety and the ability to control living space (ABS 2012). The literature also refers to 3 types of homelessness based on a cultural definition which identifies shared community standards regarding the minimum level of housing that people have a right to expect:

• primary homelessness, when people lack conventional accommodation, such as living on the streets, sleeping in parks or cars, or squatting in buildings and improvised dwellings for shelter (UNSD 2017; Chamberlain & Mackenzie 2008)

• secondary homelessness, when people are forced to move from one temporary shelter to another; for example, couch surfing (UNSD 2017; Chamberlain & Mackenzie 2008)

• tertiary homelessness, when people live in accommodation that falls below minimum standards; for example, single rooms in private boarding houses without their own bathroom, kitchen or security of tenure (Chamberlain & Mackenzie 2008).

The SHSC considers a person to be homeless if they are living in any of the following circumstances:

• non-conventional accommodation or ‘sleeping rough’—defined as living on the streets, sleeping in parks, squatting, staying in cars or railway carriages, living in improvised dwellings or living in the long grass. This definition aligns closely with the cultural definition of primary homelessness.

• short-term or emergency accommodation due to a lack of other options, including: refuges, crisis shelters, living temporarily with friends and relatives, insecure accommodation on a short-term basis, emergency accommodation arranged by a specialist homelessness agency (for example, in hotels, motels and so forth). This aligns closely with the cultural definition of secondary homelessness (AIHW 2017).

People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients 1 What is short-term or emergency accommodation? For the purposes of the SHSC, short-term or emergency accommodation provision as a service includes:

• refuges

• crisis shelters 1 • insecure accommodation on a short-term basis

• emergency accommodation arranged by a specialist homelessness agency (for example, in hotels, motels and so forth)

• boarding or rooming house Introduction • transitional housing.

The following short-term accommodation options are not included in the definition of short-term or emergency accommodation:

• hotels, motels, caravan parks and other temporary accommodation used when a person is on holiday or travelling

• custodial and care arrangements, such as prisons and hospitals

• temporary accommodation used by a person while renovating their usual residence or building a new residence (for example, weekenders, caravans).

This definition aligns closely with the cultural definition of secondary homelessness.

Also included in the definition of short-term or emergency accommodation is couch surfing or living temporarily with friends and relatives. This option is not included in this report as ‘couch surfers’ have been examined and reported on separately, see Couch surfers: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients (AIHW 2018).

Specialist homelessness services (SHS) deliver a range of services to clients—including crisis short-term or emergency accommodation. People seeking assistance from SHS providers may already be in short-term or emergency accommodation. While short-term or emergency accommodation is important for providing a place for people experiencing temporary crisis situations, research has demonstrated that access to longer term housing support, together with tenant autonomy, are critical features of helping people into ongoing, stable housing of their own (Parsell et al. 2015).

This report shows that long-term housing is difficult to secure for those who are already in short-term or emergency accommodation in Australia—only 17% were provided with long-term housing when they requested it over the 4 year period. On the other hand, 79% were able to continue their tenancy in short-term or emergency accommodation when requested. The unstable nature of this highlights the need for contemporary efforts to end homelessness in Australia.

2 People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients Profile of clients in short-term or emergency accommodation seeking SHS Of the more than 20,400 clients who, upon presentation to SHS in 2011–12 were already in short-term or emergency accommodation and seeking help (Table 1):

• over half (54%) were female 1 • almost one-third (31%) were aged 15–24

• less than 1 in 10 (8%) were employed, while 9 in 10 (92%) were unemployed or not in the labour force

• 10% were enrolled in some form of education

• almost half (47%) ever reported experiencing a mental illness, while more than 1 in 3 (37%) ever Introduction reported a mental health diagnosis

• more than one-third (36%) had ever reported they experienced domestic or family violence. Females were more than 4 times as likely to ever report that they experienced domestic or family violence than males (57% compared with 13%).

Compared with all other adult SHS clients, those in short-term or emergency accommodation were more likely to ever report having a mental health issue or problematic drug and/or alcohol use, as well as repeat episodes of homelessness. The main reasons for seeking assistance were accommodation, financial and/or interpersonal relationships.

Table 1: Profile of people in short-term or emergency accommodation and other SHS clients (%)

Adults in short-term or Other adult SHS clients(a) Characteristic emergency accommodation(a) (n=136,200) (n=20,400)

46% 37%

Male

54% 63%

Female

31% aged 15–24 29% aged 15–24 12% aged 50 and over 14% aged 50 and over Age

71% 61%

Receive services in Major cities

(continued)

People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients 3 Table 1 (continued): Profile of people in short-term or emergency accommodation and other SHS clients (%)

Adults in short-term or Other adult SHS clients(a) Characteristic emergency accommodation(a) (n=136,200) (n=20,400)

1 20% 21% Indigenous

8% 13% Introduction Employed

10% 7% Education status—enrolled

48% 36%

Living arrangement—lone person

36% 39% Ever reported experiencing domestic and family violence

47% mental health issue 33% mental health issue 37% mental health diagnosis 26% mental health diagnosis Ever reported a mental health issue

28% 18% Ever reported problematic drug and/or alcohol use

21% 9%

Experienced repeat homelessness(b)

(a) For the purposes of this report, the SHS short-term or emergency accommodation population consists of clients aged 15–17 and presenting alone, and those aged 18 and over, who were in short-term or emergency accommodation on first presentation to a SHS agency between 1 July 2011 and 30 June 2012. The other SHS population includes all clients aged 15–17 and presenting alone, and those aged 18 and over, who also accessed specialist homelessness services between 1 July 2011 and 30 June 2012 but were not in short-term or emergency accommodation on first presentation. (b) Repeat homelessness refers to clients who had transitioned from being homeless, to housed, and then homeless again at least once during the study period. Note: Data used in this analysis are unweighted and client counts are likely to be underestimated. Data from this study are not comparable to the published results of weighted data in other reports using SHSC data.

4 People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients This report presents, for the first time, a comprehensive analysis of Australia’s homeless Specialist Homelessness in short-term or emergency accommodation, Services Collection using longitudinal data from the AIHW’s Specialist Homelessness Services (SHS) Specialist Homelessness Services Collection (SHSC). assist people who are homeless, or at It examines the circumstances, experiences, risk of homelessness, by assessing their and housing outcomes for adults who were in needs, providing direct assistance such as 1 short-term or emergency accommodation as well emergency accommodation, and referring as teenagers aged 15–17 presenting alone to SHS clients to other services as required. seeking services (these clients have been included The Specialist Homelessness Services as they presented to services unaccompanied Collection (SHSC) is conducted by the AIHW while in short-term or emergency accommodation,

to monitor the assistance provided and Introduction without an established support system in place. to contribute to the evidence base that As such they are treated as adults). It analyses the service use patterns of those in short-term or shapes policy and service development. emergency accommodation and describes the: Data are provided to the AIHW by around 1,500 homelessness agencies. • characteristics of these clients The SHSC only includes data on homeless • reasons they seek assistance clients or clients at risk of homelessness • services provided and unmet demand who presented to services. It therefore does • service engagement patterns (days of support, not represent all people who are homeless span of support periods, nights of accommodation, or who are at risk of homelessness. number of support periods) A support period is the length of time • housing outcomes of these clients. a client receives services from an SHS agency. It starts on the day a client first This report is the third of 3 in the AIHW’s Housing receives a direct service and ends when Journeys of Homeless Clients Project. The first services stop. Clients may receive multiple report focusing on rough sleepers was released support periods across time. in August 2018, while the second report on couch surfers was released in December 2018. For more information on the SHSC and the project, see Appendix A.

Supplementary tables accompanying this release are available at and are referenced throughout this report as Supplementary table S.X.

People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients 5 Different types of clients in short-term or emergency accommodation This report focuses on clients who were in short-term or emergency accommodation when first presenting to SHS for assistance between 1 July 2011 and 30 June 2012. It is important to note these clients may have received assistance, including short-term or emergency accommodation, prior to 1 1 July 2011. Three cohorts of clients in short-term or emergency accommodation were defined based on their service use over the subsequent 3 years (to 30 June 2015). • Persistent service users—clients who had at least 1 support period in each financial year between 1 July 2011 and 30 June 2015. • Service cyclers—clients who had at least 1 support period between 1 July 2011 and 30 June 2012

Introduction and at least 1 other support period between 1 July 2012 and 30 June 2015. • Transitory service users—clients who had at least 1 support period between 1 July 2011 and 30 June 2012, but did not receive any support between 1 July 2012 and 30 June 2015.

More than half (57% of persistent service users and service cyclers) sought the help of SHS in more than 1 year over the 4-year period; however only 14% of these clients were assisted in each of the 4 years (persistent service users) (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Overview of short-term or emergency accommodation clients and defined service use cohorts, 2011–12

SHSC adult clients receiving support 156,600

All short-term or emergency All other SHSC clients accommodation clients 136,200 (87%) 20,400 (13%)

Persistent service users Service cyclers Transitory service users 2,900 (14%) 8,800 (43%) 8,700 (43%)

Note: Percentages may not always add to 100 due to rounding.

6 People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients How do people become homeless? A key aspect of homelessness research has been to examine how clients become homeless, experience homelessness, and how they exit homelessness. Analysing client pathways is useful in identifying general causes of homelessness—including structural and individual factors—and exits from homelessness (Johnson et al. 2015; Pillinger 2007). It also provides a better understanding of the type of services that are needed across a range of situations. 1 Structural factors influencing homelessness can include a lack of adequate income and limited access to affordable and available housing (Johnson et al. 2015; Wood et al. 2015). Individual factors cover the personal experiences or circumstances of an individual or household that places them more ‘at risk’ of becoming homeless. These can include low levels of educational attainment

and recent work experience, family and domestic violence, ill health and disability, trauma, and Introduction substance misuse (Fitzpatrick et al. 2013).

The Melbourne Institute (using the Journey’s Home longitudinal data set) found the following individual risk factors associated with homelessness (Bevitt et al. 2015):

• sex (males were more likely to experience homelessness than females) • age (respondents over 45 were twice as likely to experience homelessness than those aged 15–24) • Indigenous status (Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islanders were more likely to experience homelessness) • marital status (singles were more likely to experience homelessness than couples) • living arrangement (respondents without resident children were more likely to experience homelessness than those with children living with them) • experience of incarceration (respondents who had ever been incarcerated, including juvenile detention, were more prone to homelessness) • current circumstances (family breakdown, health problems, employment status, alcohol and drug use, recent incarceration, physical and sexual violence impact on experiences of homelessness).

Chamberlain and Johnson (2011) examined over 4,000 case histories on people experiencing homelessness between 2005 and 2006 and identified 5 typical pathways into adult homelessness:

• housing crisis • family breakdown • substance abuse • mental health • transitioning from being homeless in youth (‘youth to adult’).

The length of time that people remained homeless was also examined, classified as short (3 months or less), medium (4–11 months) and long-term (12 months or more). People who entered homelessness through housing crisis or family breakdown had a typical period of homelessness that lasted 3 months or less, while those who had substance abuse or mental health issues typically experienced periods of homelessness that lasted 12 months or more.

The triggers associated with people experiencing homelessness have been found to increase with an individual’s age and previous durations of ‘rooflessness’ and/or episodic homelessness (Pillinger 2007; Ravenhill 2003). Individual factors, such as ill health, trauma and disability, can be both a cause and a consequence of homelessness, including prolonged rough sleeping (Chamberlain & Johnson 2015).

People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients 7 How do people exit homelessness? Homelessness is a complex issue affecting many Australians. It requires a long-term and systematic effort across agencies, sectors and the community. Governments have committed to the National Housing and Homelessness Agreement (NHHA), which came into effect as of 1 July 2018. The NHHA is designed to improve access to affordable, safe and sustainable housing across the housing 1 spectrum, including to prevent and address homelessness, and to support social and economic participation (Council on Federal Financial Relations 2018).

The Journeys Home survey (Bevitt et al. 2015) found several factors to be associated with high rates of exit from homelessness. Males are both more likely to enter homelessness, and less likely to exit than females. In addition, the young (while only slightly more likely to enter homelessness) are much

Introduction more likely to exit than older respondents, lending weight to the argument that the young are more likely to cycle in and out of homelessness. Respondents with resident children are also more likely to exit homelessness than singles or couples without children living with them. It also appears that family connections are important to both preventing the entry into homelessness as well as assisting individuals out of homelessness. (For further information regarding the Melbourne Institute’s research using the Journeys Home longitudinal data set, please see Appendix A.)

Ravenhill (2003) also reports that certain events or personal factors can prompt people experiencing homelessness into wanting to exit homelessness. These can include that people: felt they had reached rock bottom; could no longer cope with the rough sleeping lifestyle; had a sudden shock or trauma, or realised that someone cared.

Additional catalysts could be ‘doing it for their children’ and ‘not wanting to be stigmatised for being homeless’. Exiting homelessness is also dependent on the availability of homelessness services (Ravenhill 2003). Access to these services was the most significant issue found in the resettlement process, including access to: advice, crisis accommodation, resettlement help, women’s refuges, rehabilitation programs, supported accommodaton, and follow-up support.

8 People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients see Box1)(Figure2). violence, One in3(34%)experienced 2ormorevulnerabilities(definedas • almosthalf(48%)reportedtheywerelivingalone, 29%werelivingwithatleastonechild: • • • 1in5(20%)wereIndigenous: • • overhalfwerefemale(54%) Of these20,400clients: presentation toSHS. short-term oremergencyaccommodationupon Of these,morethan20,400clientswerelivingin 156,600 adultspresentedtoaSHSforassistance. Between 1July2011and30June2012,nearly Who isinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation? in short-termoremergencyaccommodationareconsideredtobehomeless. were housedbut‘atrisk’ofbecominghomeless.AllclientspresentingtoSHSforassistancewhile (at riskofhomelessness).ItshouldbenotedthatmostclientsseekingassistancefromSHSagencies housing situation.Theymaybecurrentlyhomeless,orfacingtheprospectoflosingtheir one thing—theylacksuitablehousing,orareatriskofnotbeingabletomaintaintheircurrent Clients whoapproachSHSforassistancedosoavarietyofreasons,yettheyallshare 2 female clientsgenerallyyounger: force upontheirfirstpresentationtoaSHSforassistanceduring2011–12 almost 3in4(71%)werereceivingservices fewer than1in10(8%)wereemployed,44%unemployedand48%notthelabour almost 1in3(31%)wereaged15–24,with – – – malesweremorelikelytoreportlivingalone(63% comparedwith34%offemales) – – – 16%ofmalescomparedwith24%females – – – 25–49 years 15–24 years with 2%ofmales) all males 50 yearsandover females weremorelikelytoreportlivingwithatleast onechild(45%comparedwith10%ofmales). females weremorelikelytobereceivingservices in males weremorelikelytobereceivingservicesin Who seekshelpforhomelessness? ever reportedamentalhealth issue,or : 56%ofallfemales,58%males : 35%ofallfemales,26%males People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients : 9%ofallfemales,17%

Major cities

ever

reportedproblematicdrug and/oralcoholuse, Major cities Remote receive servicesin female, agedunder35,livingaloneand are… accommodation emergency Typically, or in short-term those home/contents/summary-in-cohort>. services/a-profile-of-specialist-homelessness-services-

9 Who seeks help for homelessness? 2 2

10 Who seeks help for homelessness? • Over1in4(28%)identified as • Almost2in5(37%) • Nearlyhalf(47%)identifiedashavingacurrent mentalhealthissue: • Morethan1in3(36%)clients Specifically: People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients – malesweremorelikely thanfemales(37%comparedwith20%). – higherformalesthanfemales(40%compared with34%). – – – Figure 2:Vulnerabilities,allshort-termoremergencyaccommodationclients(%) 1 July2011and30June2015. Note: (49% comparedwith45%). or familyviolence(57%comparedwith13%). aged under25,comparedwith6%ofthosewhowere50andover overall, malesweremorelikelythanfemalesto female clientsweremorethan4timesaslikely malesto more thanone-third(34%)who Includes allclientsinshort-termofemergencyaccommodationpresentingtoSHSagenciesforassistancebetween 47 ever reportedhavingamentalhealthdiagnosis: 15% ever ever reportedexperiencingdomesticorfamilyviolence: ever reportingproblematicdrug and/oralcoholuse: 32 reportedexperiencingdomesticorfamilyviolencewere 12% ever 11% reporthavingamentalhealthissue 9% ever reportexperiencingdomestic 5% 15% 2% 28 36

• thereferralsourcetoSHSwasamentalhealthservice • atthebeginningofasupportperiodtheywerereceivingassistanceformentalhealthissues following information: Clients areidentifiedashavingacurrentmentalhealthissueiftheyprovidedanyofthe ‘ referred domesticorfamilyviolenceassistance. assistance, orifduringanysupportperiodtheyrequiredand/orwereeitherprovided within thestudyperiodtheynominated‘domesticandfamilyviolence’asareasonforseeking Clients arecountedasexperiencingdomesticorfamilyviolenceifduringanysupportperiod ‘ ever In termsoftheSHSC,an‘ever’flagisgeneratedifaparticularreason,needorservice Box 1: • • theyhadbeeninarehabilitationfacility/institutionthelast12months • duringsupporttheyrequireddrug/alcoholcounselling • formalreferralsourcetoSHSwasadrugandalcoholservice • theirdwellingtypewasrehabilitation reporting period: the followinginformationatbeginningofsupportorinanyperiodduring Clients areidentifiedashavingproblematicdrugand/oralcoholuseiftheyprovidedanyof ‘ • atsomestageduringtheirsupportperiodaneedformentalhealthserviceswasidentified. • theyhadbeeninapsychiatrichospitalorunitthepast12months • • theyreportedmentalhealthissuesasareasonforseekingassistance Ever Ever Ever a reasonforseekingassistanceormain for seekingassistance. or unit they hadreported‘problematicdrugorsubstance abuse’or‘problematicalcoholuse’as their dwellingtypepriortopresentinganagencyforassistancewasapsychiatrichospital reported. ’ reportedamentalhealthissue ’ reporteddomesticorfamilyviolence ’ reportedproblematicdrugand/oralcoholuse Ever flags People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

Who seeks help for homelessness? 2 2

12 Who seeks help for homelessness? Table 2:Summaryofshort-termoremergencyaccommodationcohortdemographics,(%) • • • Themajorityofshort-termoremergencyaccommodationclientsinall3cohortswerefemale. There aresomenotableobservationsinthe3serviceusercohorts(Table2): Demographics service users. clients, basedontheirserviceusepatterns:persistentusers,cyclers,andtransitory As outlinedinChapter1,thisreportanalysed3groupsofshort-termoremergencyaccommodation Key comparativefindings People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Age Sex status Employment status Indigenous as likelytobeemployedwhencomparedwithpersistentserviceusers(10%5%). to beIndigenous(26%,21%and17%,respectively). Very fewclientswereemployedacrossallcohorts,althoughtransitoryserviceuserstwice Persistent serviceusersweremorelikelythaneithercyclersortransitory Not in labour labour in Not Unemployed Indigenous Indigenous Employed Female 35–44 55–64 45–54 25–34 15–24 force Non- Male 65+ Persistent (n=2,934) service service users users 14.1 25.6 26.0 29.2 52.5 47.5 52.1 42.8 74.4 25.6 3.9 1.2 5.1 (n=8,793) Service Service cyclers cyclers 13.2 24.1 25.4 30.9 54.1 45.9 48.6 44.4 78.6 21.4 4.7 6.9 1.5 Transitory (n=8,719) service service users users 13.2 22.4 25.1 31.2 53.4 46.6 46.2 43.9 83.2 16.8 5.7 9.9 2.6 accommodation accommodation All short-term short-term All or emergency (n=20,446) clients clients 13.3 23.6 25.4 30.8 53.6 46.4 48.1 44.0 79.9 20.1 5.0 1.9 8.0

SHSC clients clients SHSC (n=136,240) All other other All (continued) 14.0 23.5 25.2 28.8 63.0 37.0 49.4 37.9 12.6 79.4 20.6

5.7 2.7

Table 2 (continued): Summary ofshort-termoremergencyaccommodationcohortdemographics,(%) (continued): 2 Table • persistentserviceusersweremorelikelythan allothercohortsto When comparingvulnerabilitiesacrosstheservice usercohorts(Table3): • morelikelyto • Compared withotherSHSclients,thoseinshort-term oremergencyaccommodationwere(Table3): Additional vulnerabilities 3. Notstatedorunknownresponsesareexcludedfrompercentagecalculations. 2. 1. Notes Location arrangements Living other SHSCpublications. Indigenous if,atanytimewithinthereportingperiod,theyidentifiedasbeingofAboriginaland/orTorresStraitIslanderorigin. Data areunweightedandbasedonaselectcohortgroup;therefore,clientcountsnotcomparabletoweighteddatain All clientdemographics,apartfromIndigenousstatus,arebasedonthefirstsupportperiodin2011–12.Aisconsidered for persistentserviceusers more likelyto – – service users) service users) a mentalhealthissue(74%, comparedwith54%forservicecyclersand30% fortransitory domestic orfamilyviolence (49%,comparedwith40%forservicecyclers and28%fortransitory ever ever Inner regional Lone person Other family Other Couple with with Couple People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients One parent parent One Very remote Very reportproblematicdrugand/oralcoholuse. reportamentalhealthissueor diagnosis,mostpronounced Major city Major child(ren) child(ren) child(ren) without without regional Remote Couple Group Outer Outer with with Persistent (n=2,934) service service users users 11.3 75.5 20.4 51.1 12.2 3.2 9.7 0.2 4.9 5.2 6.1 (n=8,793) Service Service cyclers cyclers 11.1 15.9 70.1 24.1 47.1 12.2 2.4 0.5 5.0 5.8 5.8 Transitory (n=8,719) service service users users 11.4 16.3 69.3 22.8 47.4 12.6 2.7 0.4 4.8 6.1 6.4 ever accommodation accommodation All short-term short-term All or emergency report: (n=20,446) clients clients 11.0 15.4 70.5 23.0 47.8 12.4 2.6 0.4 5.9 4.9 6.0

SHSC clients clients SHSC (n=136,240) All other other All

10.7 24.6 61.0 11.5 12.8 25.5 35.6 2.7 7.0 1.0 7.6

Who seeks help for homelessness? 2 2

14 Who seeks help for homelessness? assistance; atalevel5times higherthanmales(52%comparedwith10%). was thatfemalesconsistently reporteddomesticandfamilyviolenceas a reasonforseeking The keydifferencebetween maleandfemaleclientsinshort-termoremergency accommodation than servicecyclersortransitoryusers. Notably, higherproportionsofpersistentservice userspresentedwithmultiplereasonsorneeds accommodation cohortswasdueto orfinancialdifficulties. reason, themostcommonreasonsforseekingassistance acrossallshort-termoremergency While notallpeopleinshort-termoremergency accommodationpresenttoservicesforthesame Reasons forseekingassistance Table 3:Summaryofshort-termoremergencyaccommodationcohortvulnerabilities,(%) • People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients alcohol use and/or drug Problematic diagnosis health Mental issue health Mental violence family and Domestic transitory serviceusersweretheleastlikelycohorttoreportthesevulnerabilities. – – transitory serviceusers). service users) problematic drugand/oralcoholuse(51%,comparedwith32%forservicecyclersand15% a mentalhealthdiagnosis(63%,comparedwith43%forservicecyclersand22%transitory Don’t know/ know/ Don’t diagnosed diagnosed reported reported reported reported reported reported missing Ever Ever Ever Ever Not Not Not Not Not

Persistent (n=2,934) service service users users 49.2 50.8 11.5 25.6 63.0 25.7 74.3 51.0 49.0 (n=8,793) Service Service cyclers cyclers 53.6 60.1 39.9 68.3 31.7 26.7 30.4 42.8 46.4 Transitory (n=8,719) service service users users 30.0 71.6 28.4 84.7 15.3 52.2 26.0 21.8 70.0 accommodation accommodation All short-term short-term All or emergency (n=20,446) clients clients 46.5 63.7 36.3 72.5 27.5 35.4 27.8 36.8 53.5

SHSC clients clients SHSC (n=136,240) All other other All 82.5 17.5 51.4 22.8 25.8 66.9 33.1 61.2 38.8 In contrast,only6%ofservice cyclersremainedinongoingsupportatthe endofthestudy. consistent withtheirhighfrequencyofengagement andhighlevelofsupport(dayssupport). Three in10(29%)persistentserviceuserswere ongoingsupportattheendofstudyperiod, unknown attheendofreportingperiod(21%). users (22%).Servicecyclershadthelargestproportion ofclientswhosehousingoutcomeswere highest forpersistentserviceusersandcyclers (both44%),andlowestfortransitoryservice accommodation werehoused(outsideofshort-term oremergencyaccommodation).Thiswas Following engagementwithagencies,morethan 1in3(35%)clientsshort-termoremergency with 26%ofservicecyclersand3%transitory service users. Persistent serviceuserswerethemostlikelytoexperiencerepeathomelessness(59%),compared clients inshort-termoremergencyaccommodationexperiencedrepeatepisodesofhomelessness. a clienttransitionsfromhomeless,tohoused,homelessagain).Overall,around1in5(21%) the studyperiod;forexample,upto30June2015.Alsoofinterestisrepeathomelessness(where Housing outcomeslooksataclient’ssituationtheendoftheirlastclosedsupportperiodwithin Housing outcomes delivery remainslong-termhousingsolutions. or emergencyaccommodationinsomeform,itisimportanttonotethatthelargestgapservice While accommodationservicesweresuppliedtoalargeproportion(80%)ofthoseinshort-term 13% oftransitoryserviceusersnotreceivingaccommodation. lowering serviceengagement:from4%forpersistentusersto7%ofcyclersand when theyfirstpresentedin2011–12.Therateofnotreceivingaccommodationincreasedwith characteristic oftheseSHSclientswasthattheywereinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation The demandforaccommodationserviceswashighall3serviceusercohorts.common improve ourunderstandingoftheoutcomesforthiscohort. the homelessnessstatuslastreportedwasunknown(18%).Linkagetootherdatasetswouldgreatly were housedattheendofsupport(22%),butthattherewasasubstantialproportionforwhom able toresolve.Itisimportantnoteforthisgroup,however,thataround1in5oftheseclients clients facerelativelytemporaryissuesthatSHSareabletoassistwithortheythemselves The temporarynatureofhomelessnessfortransitoryserviceuserssuggestthatsomethese • • • There aredistinctdifferencesevidentacrossthegroups: Service engagementacrossa4-yearperiodwastheunderlyingbasisfor3cohortdescriptions. Service use 77% ofclientshavingonly1supportperiod. period, withlessfrequentcontactagenciesapparent(59%had1–3supportperiods) period, with39%ofclientshaving10ormoresupportperiods over half(53%)ofalltransitoryserviceusersreceivedbetween1and30dayssupport,with almost 2in5(39%)servicecyclersreceivedbetween91and365daysofsupportoverthe4-year the majorityofpersistentserviceusers(67%)receivedover365dayssupportacross4-year People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

Who seeks help for homelessness? 2 3

16 Persistent service users and mayhave continuedreceivingassistance beyond30June 2015. It isimportanttonotethat someoftheseclientsmayhavereceivedassistance priorto1July2011 1 July2012and30June 2013, 1July2013and30June2014,2014 2015. they presentedtoanagency forassistanceatleastoncebetween1July 2011 and30June2012, to SHSagenciesforassistance ineachyearofthereportingperiod(2011–12 to2014–15).Thatis, There werearound2,900persistentserviceusers in2011–12.Persistentserviceuserspresented Who arepersistentservice users? 3 People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients • • • mostreceivedservicesin • themajorityofpersistentserviceuserswerefemale • mostclientswereaged15–34 Consistent withthebroadergroupofthoseinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation: smallest ofthethreecohorts. year between1July2011and30June2015.Thiscohortcomprised2,900clientswasthe Persistent serviceusersarethoseclientswhohadatleast1supportperiodineachfinancial Key findings situation ofmorethan1in10(12%,or350clients) wasunknown. accommodation, 7%(or210)roughsleepingand 5%(or150)couchsurfing.Thehousing or 1,300)werehomeless,including32%(or930) ofclientslivinginshort-termoremergency housed, including27%(or800)inpublicorcommunityhousing.Asimilarproportion(44%, homelessness. By2014–15,morethan2in5(44%,or1,300)persistentserviceuserswere When persistentserviceusersfirstsoughtassistancein2011–12,allclientswereexperiencing • • • • more likelyto: Persistent serviceusers,whencomparedwithcyclersandtransitorywere • person overthestudyperiod health issue,problematicdrugand/oralcoholuse) ever health ordrugandalcoholservices. medium orlong-termaccommodationthanmales rather thanmediumorlong-termaccommodation.Femalesweremorelikelytoreceive difficulties, andyoungerclientsweremorelikelytoreportthesereasonsthanolder persistent serviceusersweremostlikelytoreceiveshort-termoremergencyaccommodation the mostcommonreasonsforseekingassistancewererelatedtoaccommodationorfinancial experience repeatepisodesofhomelessness. receive someformofaccommodationandhavegreaternumberssupportperiodsper experience atleast2ofthe3vulnerabilityconditions(domesticorfamilyviolence,mental male persistentserviceusers(comparedwithfemales)weremorelikelytoreceivemental Persistent serviceusers reportamentalhealthissue Major cities andreportedthattheylivedalone

4. 3. 2. 1. Percentagesmaynotalwaysaddto100duerounding. Notes Of the2,900persistentserviceusersin2011–12: Data areunweightedandbased onaselectcohortgroup;therefore,clientcountsarenotcomparable toweighteddatain For furtherinformationon All clientdemographics,except for Indigenousstatus,arebasedonthefirstsupportperiodin 2011–12.Aclientisconsidered other SHSCpublications. problematic drugand/oralcohol useseeBox1:‘ Indigenous if,atanytimewithin thereportingperiod,theyidentifiedasbeingofAboriginaland/or TorresStraitIslanderorigin. People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients • higherformalesthanfemales(68%comparedwith59%). Almost two-thirds • Almost 3in4 Over half • higherformalesthanfemales(63%comparedwith 40%). Over • Almost half • • 3 in4 form of 9% with 33%offemales. 18% ofmalescompared (26%) were More than ever (77% comparedwith72%). (74% comparedwith22%formales). (25% comparedwith16%ofmales). (81% comparedwith71%offemales) males weremorelikelythanfemalesto females weremuchmorelikelyto females weremorelikelytobereceivingservicesin males weremorelikelytobereceivingservicesin were experiencingdomesticorfamily violence, half (76%)werereceivingservicesin education. enrolled in (51%) were one-quarter Indigenous (49%) (74%) female ever ever (63%) reported Ever ever some reportedhaving : (53%). flags’.

reported

ever

problematic drugand/oralcoholuse reported having amentalhealthissue 15–34 years ever Major cities experienced domesticorfamilyviolence reportexperiencingdomesticorfamilyviolence having amentalhealthdiagnosis ever ever reporthavingamentalhealthissue reportingamentalhealthissue or • • one child alone More than for assistancein2011–12. labour forceuponpresentationtoaSHS unemployed and52%werenotinthe 5% • • • females generallyyoungerthanmales: Over half : (44% comparedwith7%ofmales). living withatleastonechild (68% comparedwith36%females) living alone 15% ofmales. 50 yearsandover 25–49 years 15–24 years females weremorelikelytoreport males weremorelikelytoreport were Major cities Regional , 27% employed : (55%) half were : 57%offemales,63%males : 36%offemales,22%males

areas

(51%) were aged15–34 : living withatleast : 7%offemales, , 43%were

: were living : ever

reporting

, with :

Persistent service users 3 3

18 Persistent service users experienced bythiscohort insupportoftheirjourneythroughhomelessness. many ofthereasons(higher thanothercohorts)reflectsthenumerous challengesandsituations to one occasion,however,itisonlycapturedonce in thereporting.Thereasonsanalysedhererefer SHS agenciesacrossthe4-yearstudy.Theymay haveidentifiedthesamereasononmorethan Persistent serviceusersmayhaveidentifiedany ofthesereasonsatanypointcontactwith interpersonal relationships,health/medical,and ‘other’reasons. and canbegroupedintoseveralbroadcategories covering:financialissues,accommodation, seeking assistance.Thesereasonscanhighlight the riskfactorsassociatedwithhomelessness, When approachingSHSagenciesforassistance, clientsmayidentifyanumberofreasonsfor Why didpersistentservice users seekassistance? persistent serviceusers(10%)reportednoneoftheseconditions(Figure3). use), whilearound6in10(62%)experienced violence, (22%) experienced issue, whilealmosthalf(49%) Overall, almost3in4(74%)persistentserviceusers People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Figure 3:Vulnerabilities,persistentserviceusers(%) Note: all reasonsforseekingassistance. Thehighproportionsofpersistentservice usersreporting Includes allpersistentserviceusers2011–12to2014–15. ever reportingamentalhealthissue,or 74 all three vulnerabilityconditions(definedas ever 15% 10 reportedexperiencingdomesticorfamilyviolence.Over1in5 two ormore 22% ever 16% ever reportingproblematicdrugand/oralcohol reportedexperiencingamentalhealth vulnerabilityconditions.Just1in10 22% ever experiencingdomesticorfamily 9% 4% 3% 51 49

(Figure 4). inappropriate dwellingconditions(65%)orbecausetheirpreviousaccommodationhadended(60%) issues (90%).Morespecifically,clientssoughtassistanceforhousingcrisis(76%),inadequateor The majorityofpersistentserviceuserspresentingtoservicessoughtassistanceforaccommodation accommodation issues Persistent serviceusersmostcommonlysoughtassistancefor Figure 4: Accommodation issueskeyreasonforseekingassistance,persistentserviceusers(%) 4: Figure • • • for: assistance to seek than likely Younger clients Source:

prior accommodation ending ending accommodation prior dwelling inappropriate or inadequate 63%) with compared (78% crisis housing (66% compared with 50%). with (66% compared 58%) with (67% compared conditions Previous accommodation Inadequate/inappropriate SupplementarytableS.REASONS.11. dwelling conditions older clients clients older Housing crisis Housing (aged 15–24) more were People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Reason ended (aged 50 and over) over) (aged and 50 0

10 20 30 • • clients non-Indigenous clients Indigenous 40 inadequate or inappropriate dwelling dwelling inappropriate or inadequate (81% 75%) crisis housing with compared conditions (73% compared with 63%). with compared (73% conditions Per cent 50 60 were more likely than than likely more were to seek assistance for: assistance toseek 70 service users service persistent All Females Males 80 90 19

Persistent service users 3 3

20 Persistent service users for seekingassistanceandmalesweremorelikelytoreportthesereasonsthanfemales. Employment difficulties(21%)andproblematicgambling(5%)werelesslikelytobecitedasa reason • unemployment(37%). • housingaffordabilitystress(56%) • financialdifficulties(80%) issues (Figure5).Thekeyreasonswere: Almost 9in10(87%)persistentserviceusersalsosoughtassistancefromSHSagencieswithfinancial interpersonal relationships Persistent serviceusersalsosoughtassistancewithfinancialissuesand People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Figure 5:Financialissuesasareasonforseekingassistance,persistentserviceusers(%) • • for: assistance than Young clients Source: Employment difficulties employment difficulties (25% compared (25%compared difficulties employment compared (60% stress affordability housing with 19%).with 45%) with Problematic gambling

Financial difficulties older clients clients older affordability stress affordability SupplementarytableS.REASONS.11. Unemployment (aged 15–24) likely more were R Housing ea so (aged 50 and over) over) (agedto and 50 seek n 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 unemployment (41% 36%). unemployment with compared clients non-Indigenous clients Indigenous 4 0 P er c en 5 t 0 6 All persistent service users persistentAll service Females Males 0 were more likely than than likely more were to seek assistance for for assistance toseek 7 0 8 0 9

0 • sexualabuse:11%offemales,3%males(females almost4timesmorelikelythanmales). • • sexual abuse: a reasonforseekingassistance,withthelargestdifferencesdomesticandfamilyviolence Females weremorelikelythanmalestoreportalmostallaspectsofinterpersonalrelationships as • timeoutfromfamily/othersituation(36%). • domesticandfamilyviolence(43%) • relationship/familybreakdown(56%) interpersonal relationships(Figure6).Thekeyreasonswere: Almost 3in4(74%)persistentserviceusersalsosoughtassistancefromSHSagencieswith

than males) relationship/family breakdown:62%offemales,50%males domestic andfamilyviolence:67%offemales,15%males(femalesalmost5timesmorelikely users (%) Figure 6:Interpersonalrelationshipsasareasonforseekingassistance,persistentservice • • • including: relationships, interpersonal of aspects all for assistance seek thanlikely Younger clients Source: Relationship/family breakdown Relationship/family Domestic and family violence domestic and family violence violence family and domestic situation family/other from out time breakdown relationship/family (53% compared with 14%). with compared (53% 25%) with compared (48% 28%) with (74% compared SupplementarytableS.REASONS.11. Time out from family/ from out Time older clients clients older Non-family violence Non-family other situation (aged 15–24) more were People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Sexual abuse Reason (aged 50 and over) over) (agedto and 50 0

20 • • • including: relationships, interpersonal of aspects all for clients non-Indigenous Indigenous 30 domestic and family violence violence family and domestic breakdown relationship/family situation family/other from out time (57% compared with 38%). with compared (57% (61% 55%) with compared 32%) with compared (48% Per cent 40

clients 50 were more likely than than likely more were All persistent service users persistentAll service Females Males to seek assistance assistance toseek 60

80 21

Persistent service users 3 3

22 Persistent service users (80% comparedwith61%). Males weremorelikelythanfemalestoseekassistancefromSHSagenciesforhealth/medicalissues • problematicdrugorsubstanceuse(35%). • medicalissues(39%) • mentalhealthissues(51%) (Figure 7).Thekeyreasonswere: Seven in10(70%)persistentserviceusersapproachedSHSagenciesforassistancewithhealthissues Persistent serviceusersalsosoughtassistanceforissuescategorisedas‘health/medical’reasons. Health reasonsforpersistentserviceuserstoseekassistance People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

Figure 7: Health/medical issuesasareasonforseekingassistance,persistentserviceusers(%) 7: Figure or substance use (30% compared with 22%). with compared (30% use substance or clients Young clients issues. health all almost for assistance seek thanlikely clients Older Source: Problematic alcohol useProblematic alcohol Mental healthMental issues SupplementarytableS.REASONS.11. or substance use or substance Problematic drug to seek assistance for problematic drug drug problematic for assistance to seek Medical issues Medical younger clients younger (aged 50 and over) were more more were over) (aged and 50 were more likely than likely more were R ea so n 0 (aged 15–24) to 10 older 20 than than clients Non-Indigenous 24%). with compared (34% use alcohol problematic for clients non-Indigenous Indigenous with 45%). with compared (53% issues health mental for Per cent 30 Indigenous clients Indigenous

clients 40 were more likely than than likely more were All persistent service users persistentAll service Females Males to seek assistance assistance toseek to seek assistance assistance toseek were more likely likely more were 50 60

• childcare (23% comparedwith2%). • family/relationshipassistance (65%comparedwith40%) • assistancefordomestic/family violence(62%comparedwith12%) Females weremorelikely thanmalestoneed: • recreation(56%comparedwith51%). • meals(64%comparedwith58%) • laundry/showerfacilities(57%comparedwith 48%) Males weremorelikelythanfemalestoneed: transport andfinancialinformation(both76%). advocacy/liaison (95%)andmaterialaid/brokerage (89%).Almost8in10clientsalsoneeded users, themostcommonofthesewereadvice/information (100%),otherbasicassistance(98%) Virtually allclients(2,930outof2,934)neededatleast1‘generalservice’.Forpersistentservice Persistent serviceusersalsoneed‘generalservices’ persistent serviceusersrequiringthisassistance. Persistent serviceusersalsoneededassistancetosustainhousingtenure,withalmost8in10(79%) • long-termhousing(81%comparedwith75%). • continuationofprovisionshort-termoremergencyaccommodation(85%comparedwith69%) provision, mostnotably: Indigenous clientsweremorelikelythannon-Indigenoustoneedalltypesofaccommodation • long-termhousing(83%comparedwith65%). • medium-term/transitionalhousing(83%comparedwith62%) • continuationofprovisionshort-termoremergencyaccommodation(75%comparedwith54%) of accommodation,including: Younger clients(aged15–24)weremorelikelythanolder50andover)toneedalltypes short-term oremergencyaccommodation(72%). requested long-termhousing(77%),followedbymedium-term/transitional(76%)and users, withalmostallclients(92%)needingthisservice.Persistentserviceusersmostcommonly Accommodation istheserviceandassistancetypemostcommonlyrequestedbypersistent Persistent serviceusersarehighlylikelytoneedaccommodationprovision same needmayhavebeenidentifiedonmultipleoccasions. reporting period(2011–15)andmayhavereportedmultipleneedsineachsupportperiod,orthe Persistent serviceuserspresentedtoSHSagenciesatleastonceineachfinancialyearofthe services andprofessionalorlegalservices. laundry andtransport,throughtomorecomplexspecialistservicessuchashealthmedical housing. Theseservicesrangefrombasicsupportandassistancesuchasmeals,showerfacilities, agencies provideorreferclientstomanyotherservicestargetingunderlyingbarrierssustainable While thefocusofSHSsupportisonprovidingstablehousingorassistingclientstoremainhoused, What servicesdidpersistentserviceusersneed? People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

Persistent service users 3 3

24 Persistent service users (35% compared with 31% non-Indigenous clients) (Supplementary table S.PSU NEEDS.12). S.PSU table (Supplementary 31% clients) with compared (35% non-Indigenous (41% of males clients 24% Indigenous females) and proportion with ahigher were compared there these, (32%). Of issues drug/alcohol for assistance required also users service Persistent • almost1in3(29%)neededspecialistcounsellingservices. • almosthalf(45%)needed‘other’specialisedservices • almost3in5(57%)neededhealth/medicalservices services (Figure8): other specialisedservice.Almost3in4(71%)persistentserviceusersneededatleast1ofthese ‘Other’ specialistservicesincludeshealth/medicalservices,counsellingand mental healthanddrug/alcoholservices Persistent serviceusersalsoneed‘other’specialistservices,aswell • laundry/showerfacilities(61%comparedwith49%). • meals(70%comparedwith58%) • assistancefordomestic/familyviolence(51%comparedwith34%) Indigenous clientsweremorelikelythannon-Indigenoustoneedgeneralservicesrelatingto: • assertiveoutreach(63%comparedwith44%). • legalinformation(59%comparedwith34%) • assistancetoobtain/maintaingovernmentallowance(61%comparedwith36%) services relatingto: Young clients(aged15–24)weremorelikelythanolder50andover)toneedgeneral People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Source: Figure 8:Needs—otherspecialistservices,persistentserviceusers(%) Younger (15 Non-Indigenous service users service All persistent All SupplementarytableS.PSUNEEDS.12. Older (50+) Older Indigenous Females Males - 24) 0 Health/medical services Health/medical 10 20 Specialist counselling services Per cent 30 40 Other specialised services specialised Other 50

was providedmoreoften toolderclientsthanyounger(28%compared with20%). with medium-term/transitional housing(68%comparedwith58%).However, long-termhousing Younger (aged15–24)persistent serviceusersweremorelikelythanolder clientstobeprovided medium-term/transitional housing(66%compared with55%). Female persistentserviceusersweremorelikely thanmalepersistentserviceuserstoreceive • • • when theyapproachedaSHSagencyforaccommodationassistance.Oftheseclients(Figure9): More than9in10(91%)persistentserviceuserswereprovidedwithsomeformofaccommodation short-term oremergencyaccommodation Persistent serviceusersweremostlikelytocontinuebeprovidedwith the clienttoanotherservice. services directlytotheclient,orifagencyisunableprovideservicedirectly,theymayrefer shelter, tospecialisedservicessuchascounsellingorlegalsupport.Eithertheagencyprovidesthese Services availabletoclientsrangefromthedirectprovisionofaccommodation,suchasabedin What serviceswereprovidedtopersistentserviceusers? to 85%ofthoseneedingthisservice 77% neededlong-termhousing,providedto19%ofthoseneedingthisservice. 76% neededmedium-term/transitionalhousing,providedto61%ofthoseneedingthisservice 72% neededcontinuedprovisionofshort-termoremergencyaccommodation,anditwasprovided Sources: Figure 9:Accommodationserviceprovision,persistentusers(%)

All persistent service users persistentAll service users persistentAll service users persistentAll service SupplementarytablesS.PSUPROVIDED.13,REFERRED.14, S.PSUGAP15. People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Females Females Females Males Males Males 0 10 Short-term or emergencyShort-term accommodation 20 Medium-term/transitional housing Medium-term/transitional Provided 30 Long-term housing Long-term 40 Per cent Referred 50 60 Neither 70 80 90 100

Persistent service users 3 3

26 Persistent service users • laundry/showerfacilities: neededby52%,providedto98%ofthoseneeding thisservice. • materialaid/brokerage: neededby89%,providedto98%ofthoseneeding thisservice • meals:neededby61%, providedto98%ofthoseneedingthisservice • transport:neededby76%,providedto98%of thoseneedingthisservice • advocacy/liaison:neededby95%,providedto 100% ofthoseneedingthisservice • advice/information:neededby100%,provided to100%ofthoseneedingthisservice needing theserviceinclude: The mostcommonservicesneededbypersistent serviceusersandcommonlyprovidedtothose Virtually allpersistentserviceusers(2,930outof 2,934clients)requiredatleast1generalservice. Provision ofgeneralservices 2. 1. Notes clients whoneededthatservice,persistentserviceusers,bysex(%) Table 4:DrugandalcoholcounsellingmentalhealthservicesprovidedbySHStothose had ahigherprovisionofmentalhealthservices(70%comparedwith59%)(Table4). more likelytobeprovidedthisservicethanfemales(60%).Malepersistentusersalso Of thosepersistentserviceuserswhoneededdrug/alcoholcounselling,males(71%)were drug/alcohol counsellingandmentalhealthservices Male persistentserviceusersweremorelikelytobeprovidedwith housed. Ofthosepersistentserviceuserswhoneededthisassistance(79%),94%receivedit. and reflectstheassistanceprovidedbySHSintransitionfromhomelessnesstobecoming This assistancecanincludemediationandliaisonserviceswithroommatesorrealestateagents The needfor‘assistancetosustainhousingtenure’wasalsocommonlyrequiredbythiscohort. likely thannon-Indigenousclientstobeprovidedwithlong-termhousing(21%compared18%). medium-term/transitional housing(63%comparedwith55%).Indigenousclientswereslightlymore Non-Indigenous clientsweremorelikelythanIndigenoustobeprovidedwith People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Mental health health Mental Drug and alcohol counselling Service other SHSCpublications. Data areunweightedandbasedonaselectcohortgroup;therefore,clientcountsnotcomparabletoweighteddatain Base isthoseclientswhoidentifiedaneedfortheseservices. Mental health services health Mental services Psychiatric services Psychological 68% 70% 49% 55% 71% 71%

60% 60% 58% 39% 59% 45%

persistent serviceusers,bysex(%) Table 5:Accommodationservicesnotprovidedorreferredtoclientswhoidentifiedaneed, were notprovidedorreferredforthishousingsolutionduring2011–15(Table5andFigure9). Despite this, almost one-third of persistent service users who identified a need for long-term housing form ofaccommodationoverallislow(4%). perhaps unsurprisingthattheproportionofpersistentserviceusersnotprovidedorreferredsome combined withtheextendedperiodoftimepersistentserviceusersareengagedservices, it is The needforanyaccommodationishighpersistentserviceusers(92%).Thislevelofneed, service ismeetinglong-termhousingneeds The largestgapinaccommodationserviceprovisionforpersistent the service. for in a particularsupportperiod,butwereeithernotprovided ornotreferredtoadifferentagency as needingawiderangeofservices.Unmetneedsaretheservicesthatclientidentified As describedearlier,clientsreceivingsupportfromspecialisthomelessnessservicesoftenidentify What arethegapsinserviceprovision? referred formedium-term/transitionalhousing(26%comparedwith19%). Of persistentserviceusers,Indigenousclientsweremorelikelythannon-Indigenoustobe the mostfrequentlyreferredservicewaslong-termhousing(51%). appointment orinterview.Ofthosepersistentserviceuserswhoneededanaccommodationservice, an alternativeserviceproviderandincludeswherethatacceptstheclientfor The SHSCalsocollectsreferralinformationfromanagency.Thisisafortheclienttoattend Referral ofservices (83% comparedwith78%),andtrainingassistance(75%70%). to beprovidedassistancefor:legalinformation(88%comparedwith83%),education Non-Indigenous persistentserviceusersweremorelikelythanIndigenous (85% comparedwith82%),andeducationalassistance(83%to81%). for domesticorfamilyviolence(94%femalescomparedwith76%males),assistancetrauma Female persistentserviceusersweremorelikelythanmalestobeprovidedwithassistance 2. 1. Baseisthoseclientswhoidentified aneedfortheseservices. Notes All accommodation types types accommodation All Data areunweighted andbasedonaselectcohort group;therefore,clientcounts arenotcomparabletoweighted datain other SHSCpublications. Medium-term or or Medium-term accommodation emergency or Short-term Long-term housing Long-term housing transitional People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients All persistent service users service persistent All 30% 19% 8% 4% 36% 24% 7% 4% 25% 10% 14% 3%

Persistent service users 3 3

28 Persistent service users Table 6:Mentalhealthservicesnotprovidedorreferred,persistentserviceusers,bysex(%) services overall(13%)(Table6). Less than1in7persistentserviceusersdidnotreceiveassistanceorareferralformentalhealth persistent serviceusers The gapinservicedeliveryformentalhealthserviceswaslow service users). long-term housing(31%notprovidedorreferredcomparedwith26%Indigenouspersistent The servicegapwasgreaterfornon-IndigenousthanIndigenouspersistentusersneeding in serviceprovisionforlong-termhousing(30%notprovidedorreferred,comparedwith23%). Younger clients(aged15–24)weremorelikelythanolder50andover)tohaveagap housing outcomes forclientscanbe inferred. of accommodation.Indoing sotheimpactthathigherlevelsofsupport (or contact)haveonthe of supportperiodsaclient receives,lengthofthosesupportperiods,days ofsupportandnights number ofproxymeasures provideinformationonengagementwithSHS includingthe:number There isnosinglemeasure toassessthelevelofserviceengagementby aclient,instead How dopersistentserviceusers engagewithservices? were providedwithorreceivedareferralformental healthservices(agapof11%). or receivedareferralformentalhealthservices (a gapof17%);while89%non-Indigenousclients or receiveareferralformentalhealthservicesoverall: 83%ofIndigenousclientswereprovidedwith Indigenous persistentserviceuserswerelesslikely thannon-Indigenousclientstobeprovidedwith older clientswereprovidedwithorreceivedareferral formentalhealthservices(agapof8%). were providedwithorreceivedareferralformentalhealthservices(agapof13%);while92% to beprovidedwithorreceiveareferralformentalhealthservicesoverall:87%ofyoungerclients Younger persistentserviceusers(aged15–24)werelesslikelythanolderclients50andover) services (agapof15%). (a gapof9%)while85%femaleswereprovidedwithorreceivedareferralformentalhealth services overall:91%ofmaleswereprovidedwithorreceivedareferralformentalhealth Females werelesslikelythanmalestobeprovidedwithorreceiveareferralformentalhealth 2. 1. Baseisthoseclientswhoidentifiedaneedfortheseservices. Notes People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Mental health services overall services health Mental Data areunweightedandbasedonaselectcohortgroup;therefore,clientcountsnotcomparabletoweighteddatain other SHSCpublications. Psychological services Psychological Mental health services health Mental services Psychiatric All persistent service users service persistent All 23% 23% 13% 15% 22% 22% 11% 9% 23% 23% 18% 15%

support periods(31%compared with25%fornon-Indigenousclients). clients (62%comparedwith 57%).However,Indigenousclientsweremore likelytoreceive10–19 Non-Indigenous clientsweremorelikelytohave received1–9supportperiodsthanIndigenous received 1–2supportperiods,comparedwith11% ofyoungerpersistentserviceusers. period, comparedwithyoungerclients(aged15–24). Over1in5(22%)olderpersistentserviceusers Older clients(aged50andover)hadfewersupport periodsacrossthe4yearsofreporting periods, comparedwith9%offemalepersistent serviceusers. males. Comparatively,almost2in5(17%)male persistent serviceusershad20ormoresupport 4-year reportingperiod,with66%offemales 1–9supportperiods,comparedwith56%for Female persistentserviceusersweremorelikelytohavefewersupportperiodsintotalacrossthe than 1financialyearofthereportingperiod. client forpersistentserviceusersis,inpart,duetothiscohortaccessingSHSassistancemore all clientsinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation.Thehighernumberofsupportperiodsper (39%) persistentserviceusershaving10ormoresupportperiods(Figure10),comparedwith9%of periods perperson)thanallclientsinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation,withalmost25 Persistent serviceusersweremorelikelytohavefrequentcontact(highernumbersofsupport received 17,500supportperiodsintotal,comparedwith14,400forfemalepersistentserviceusers. received almost32,000supportperiodsduringthistime.Ofthese,malepersistentserviceusers Across the4yearsto30June2015,therewere2,900persistentserviceusersandtheseclients Number ofsupportperiods Figure 10:Numberofsupportperiods,persistentserviceusers(%) Source: Non-Indigenous Younger (15-24) SupplementarytableS.SUPPORT.24.

service users service All persistent All Older (50+) Older Indigenous Females Males People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients 0 1 0 2 0 1 t 3 o 0 9 4 0 P 1 er 0 5 c to 0 en 1 9 t 6 0 2 0 7 or 0 m or e 8 0 9 0 1 0 29

Persistent service users 3 3

30 Persistent service users period) overthe4yearsofstudy. to notethatthesedaysofsupportmaynotbeconsecutive, theymayoccuratanypoint(support more likelytoreceiveahighernumberofdays supportthanmales(Figure12).Itisimportant across the4-yearreportingperiod,with26%receivingmorethan960daysofsupport.Females were Two-thirds (67%) of persistent service users received 365 days of support or more (or 1 year or more) Days ofsupport for males(Figure11). 5 (19%)supportperiodsforfemaleslastedmorethan90days,comparedwithjustover1in10(11%) support periodswerefor7daysorless,comparedwith49%females.Comparatively,almost1in of thereportingperiod,overhalf(55%)lastedbetween1and7days.Formales,3in5(61%) Of the32,000supportperiodsthatwereprovidedtopersistentserviceusersacross4years Length ofsupportperiods People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Figure 11:Lengthofsupportperiod,persistentserviceusers,bysex(%) Source: service users service All persistent All

SupplementarytableS.SUPPORT.25 Females Males 1 day 1 0 10 2–7 days 2–7 20 30 8–60 days 8–60 40 P er 50 c en 61–365 days 61–365 t 60 70 More than 365 days 365 than More 80 90 100 of timeinsupport(Figure13). the reportingperiodinsupport.Almost15(19%)persistentserviceusersspentmorethan75% of thereportingperiodinsupport,whileanother27%spentbetweenone-quarterandone-half of One-third (33%)ofallpersistentserviceusersspentuptoone-quarter(forexample,365days)

Figure 12:Numberofdaysclientreceivedsupport,persistentserviceusers(%) Source: Figure 13:Proportionoftimespentinsupport,persistentserviceusers(%) Source: service users service All persistent All Females SupplementarytableS.SUPPORT.25. SupplementarytableS.SUPPORT.25. Males 21% 0 People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients 19% 121–240 days 121–240 days 4–10 1 0 27% 2 0 241– 480 days 480 241– days 11–30 3 0 33% 4 0 P er 5 c 0 en 481–960 days 481–960 days 31–60 t M 51– U 26 p o 6 – t r 0 e 75% o 50% t 25% h an ( ( 731 t 75% 366–70 d ( 7 u 0 p t o ( o

m 1095 d 365d o More than 960 days 960 than More days 61–120 r e 8 ays t 0 h ays ays an ) ) 1095d ) 9 0 ays ) 1 0

Persistent service users 3 3

32 Persistent service users reporting period,while16%receivedaccommodation inonlyone. More than1in4(28%)persistentserviceusersreceived accommodationineachofthe4years medium-term/transitional housing,and14%inlong-term housing. accommodation. Incomparison,lessthanhalf(46%) receivedanynightsofaccommodationin The majorityofpersistentserviceusers(61%)received atleast1nightofshort-termoremergency not receive any nights of accommodation across the 4-year reporting period (18% compared with 12%). Non-Indigenous persistentserviceusersweremore likelythanIndigenouspersistentserviceusersto younger clients(27%). clients. Olderclientswerealsomorelikelytoreceiveaccommodationineachofthe4years(32%)than receive moreaccommodationnights,with20%receiving961ormore,compared11%ofyounger receive anyaccommodation(30%comparedwith13%).However,olderclientsweremorelikelyto A higherproportionofolderclients(aged50andover)thanyounger15–24)didnot users (25%). more likelytoreceiveaccommodationineachofthe4years(31%)thanfemalepersistentservice compared withfemalepersistentserviceusers(14%).Malewerealso A higherproportionofmalepersistentserviceusersdidnotreceiveanyaccommodation(19%), accommodation (or4monthsormore)overtheyears(Figure14). accommodation. Themajority(53%)ofpersistentserviceusersreceived121nightsormore 1 in5(16%)didnotreceiveanynightsofaccommodation.Afurther7%received1–10 While 9in10(92%)persistentserviceusersidentifiedaneedforaccommodationservices,almost Nights ofaccommodation People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Figure 14:Nightsofaccommodation,persistentserviceusers(%) Source: 10 15 20 25 30 Per cent 0 5

c a Supplementary tableS.SUPPORT.25.

o c

t a d o m m

o i

i n

1 –

h g

s t

– 1

g i

t h

0 3

– 1

g i

t h

0 6

i n

– 1

h g

2 1

s t

1 2

g i

–

t h

0 4

1 4

g i

–

t h

0 8

i n

1 8

h g

s t

Table 7:Repeatepisodesofhomelessness,persistentserviceusers(%) the ‘journey’componenttoexitinghomelessness. to housed,andthenhomelessagainatleastonceduringthistime.Thisissignificantasithighlights 2011–12 and2014–15(Table7).Thismeanstheclienthadtransitionedfrombeinghomeless, Almost 3in5(59%)persistentserviceusersexperiencedrepeatepisodesofhomelessnessbetween Repeat episodesofhomelessness other short-termoremergencyaccommodationcohorts. persistent serviceuserswereinongoingsupportattheendofstudyperiod,muchhigherthan 2011–12 totheirhousingsituationattheendofstudyperiod,30June2015.Almost1in3(29%) instead, theycomparetheclient’shousingsituationatstartoftheirfirstperiodsupportduring the reportingperiod.Thedatapresentedheredonotreflectchangeswithinperiod; may alsohavehadanumberofchangesintheirhousingsituationoverthecourse4years beginning oftheirfirstsupportperiodtotheendreportingperiod,30June2015.Clients The housingoutcomespresentedhereconsiderthechangesinaclient’ssituationfrom What are the housing outcomes for persistent service users? Repeat homelessness Indigenous status Indigenous People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Age sex

Persistent service users service Persistent repeat homelessness 47% homelessness 67% repeat homelessness 56% homelessness 68% homelessness 59% 59% 59% of clients aged 25 and over experienced experienced over and 25 aged clients of of non-Indigenous clients experienced experienced clients non-Indigenous of of females experienced repeat repeat experienced females of homelessness repeat experienced males of homelessness repeat experienced of clients aged 15–24 experienced repeat repeat 15–24 aged experienced clients of of Indigenous clients experienced repeat repeat experienced clients Indigenous of

Persistent service users 3 3

34 Persistent service users Table 8:Housingoutcomesattheendoflastclosedsupportperiod,persistentserviceusers of support(Table8). Overall, thehousingsituationof12%(or350)persistentserviceuserswasunknownatend • asimilarproportion(44%,or1,300)ofpersistentserviceuserswerehomeless: • over2in5(44%,or1,300)persistentserviceuserswerehoused: Looking attheendoflastclosedsupportperiodallpersistentserviceusers: or emergencyaccommodationcohort),whiletheremainderhadendedtheirlatestsupportperiod. persistent serviceuserswereinongoingSHSsupport(about5timeshigherthananyothershort-term At thestartofstudyperiod,allclientswerehomeless.end29% tenure, andtheconditionsofoccupancy. clients. Todetermineaclient’shousingsituation,3aspectsreconsidered:dwellingtype, At thebeginningandendofeachsupportperiod,aSHSagencyrecordshousingsituation for persistentserviceusers? What isthehousingsituationatendoflastclosedsupportperiod People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients – 5%(or150)couchsurfingornotenure. – 32%(or900)inshort-termoremergencyaccommodation – 7%(or200)withnoshelterorimproviseddwelling(roughsleeper) – 3%(or<100clients)ininstitutionalsettings. – 14%(or400clients)inprivateorotherhousing – 27%(or800clients)inpublicorcommunityhousing Housing situationattheendofsupportandclientpercentage emergency accommodation Rough sleeping Short-term or Couch surfing Homeless 32% 7% 5%

Institutional settings community housing other housing Private or Public or Housed 14% 27% 3%

Unknown Unknown 12% ?

after 30June2015. period. Itispossiblethattheseclientsre-engaged withSHSagenciesandsoughtfurtherassistance The housingoutcomefor12%ofpersistentservice userswasunknownattheendofreporting of thestudyperiod. mean animmediateendtohomelessness,and44% ofthiscohortremainedhomelessattheend a periodofatleast4years,over2in5(44%)were housed.However,engagementwithSHSdoesnot were ‘homeless’.Bytheendof2014–15,whenpersistent serviceusershadengagedwithSHSover At thestartofstudyperiod(2011–12)allthoseinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation secure long-termhousingoutcomes. many persistentserviceusers,whichischaracterisedbythedifficultiesfacedthiscohortto the 4yearsofreportingperiod.Thishighlights‘journey’natureexitinghomelessness for they hadtransitionedfromhomelessnesstobeinghousedagainatleastonce in 3 in5(59%)clientsexperiencinghomelessnessmorethanonceduringthereportingperiod.That is, Repeat episodesofhomelessnesswerecommoninthepersistentserviceusercohort,withalmost accommodation wasmostcommonlyprovidedtotheseclients. need accommodationthanolderpersistentserviceusers,andadditionalshort-termoremergency service userssoughtassistancefromSHS.Youngerpersistentweremorelikelyto As withallcohortsinthisstudypopulation,accommodationwasthekeyreasonthatpersistent issue, orproblematicdrugand/oralcoholuse. experienced atleast2ofthe3vulnerabilityconditions:domesticorfamilyviolence,mentalhealth aged 15–34andlivingalone.Highlightingthecomplexneedsofthiscohort,almosttwo-thirds(62%) of thoseinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation2011–12.Themajoritywerefemale, Persistent serviceuserswerethesmallestof3cohorts,accountingfor14%(or2,900clients) What doesthistellus? • • • persistent service users. users. service persistent (10% 19%). housing other or with compared inprivate to be likely less 25%), though with compared (33% housing community or inpublic to be clients younger than likely more were 47%). at clients Older (both of support end the at housed to be likely equally were users service Younger persistent older and ofsupport. end the at accommodation emergency or short-term in were (41% clients 1in3(29%) younger 45%). ofsupport end the Almost at with compared support. of their end the at accommodation emergency or inshort-term were (37%) 2in 5males 35%). Almost with compared (54% period support closed last oftheir end the at homeless to be females than likely more were users service persistent male comparison, In of support. end the at housing 17% other or and housing inprivate community or in public living were (33%) 36%). in3females One with (52% compared period support closed last their Overall, there was little difference in housing outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous non-Indigenous and Indigenous between outcomes housing in difference little was there Overall, homeless (aged to be over) Younger and (aged 50 clients 15–24) older clients than likely less were of end the at housed to be males than likely more were users service persistent Female People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

Persistent service users 3 3

36 Persistent service users People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

* will beabletohelpherfindsecure,long-termhousing. with herboyfriend.Thistimesheishopingtheoutcomewillbedifferent,andthatagency going toseeaSHSagency.Shehassoughthelpfewtimesbefore,butalwaysendedupback Jess knowsshehastofindamorepermanenthomeforherandbaby.Tomorrow,is the otherwomenhaveassuredherthatsheissafe.Itnotafeelingusedto. a ‘talkingto’withhisfists.Sheisterrifiedthathewillfindher,justasdidtwicebefore,but and 2daysagoafriendbroughtherhere—towomen’srefuge—afterboyfriendgave something Jesshasnotfeltforaverylongtime.Sheis5monthspregnant,doesn’thavejob, Jess*, 23,looksaroundtheroom.Thereisaposteronwall—it’sbrightandcheery; Case study1:Persistentserviceuser AIHW tostereotypehomelessnessclients. present anexampleofa‘typical’persistentshort-termoremergencyaccommodationserviceuser;itisnottheintentionthe This casestoryisnotbasedonanactualperson.Itonde-identifieddatacollatedfromtheSHSC.intendedto

in eachfinancial yearofthereporting period. and 30June2012,at leastoncemorebetween1July2012and30June 2015,butdidnotappear 30 June2015.Thatis,they presentedtoanagencyforassistanceatleast oncebetween1July2011 assistance inthefirstfinancial yearofthereportingperiod(2011–12) and againatleastonceby There werearound8,800 servicecyclersin2011–12.Servicepresented toSHSagenciesfor Who areservicecyclers? 4 • • • mostwerereceivingservicesin • themajorityofservicecyclerswerefemale • mostservicecyclerswereaged15–34 Consistent withthebroadergroupofthoseinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation: 8,800 clientsandwassimilarinsizetothetransitoryserviceusercohort. and atleast1othersupportperiodbetweenJuly201230June2015.Thiscohortcomprised Service cyclersareclientswhohadaleast1supportperiodbetweenJuly2011and30June2012 Key findings of over1in5(21%,or1,800)wasunknown. (or around400)roughsleepingand5%almost 500)couchsurfing.Thehousingsituation including over1in4(26%,or2,200)livingshort-term oremergencyaccommodation,5% 1 in5(19%,or1,700)privateotherhousing. Over1in3(36%,or3,100)werehomeless, were housed,includingalmost1in4(23%,or2,000) inpublicorcommunityhousing,andalmost homelessness. Bytheendoftheirlastclosedsupportperiod,morethan2in5(44%,or3,800) When servicecyclersfirstsoughtassistancein2011–12,allclientswereexperiencing • • • • • users to: Service cyclerswerelesslikelythanpersistentserviceusersyetmoretransitory • accommodation werenotprovidedwith,orreferredtoanotheragency,forthishousingsolution issue, problematicdrugand/oralcoholuse) mental healthordrugandalcoholservices. older clients(aged50andover) (aged 15–24)weremostlikelytobeprovidedwithmedium-term/transitionalhousingthan to beprovided;andmorecommonlyprovidedmalesthanfemales.Youngerclients issues, andyoungerclientsweremorelikelytoreportaccommodationreasonsforseekingassistance short-term oremergencyaccommodationwasmorelikelythanmediumlong-termhousing the mostcommonreasonsforseekingassistancewererelatedtoaccommodationorfinancial experience repeatepisodesofhomelessness. receive atleast1nightofaccommodation have morefrequentcontactwithSHS(highernumbersofsupportperiodsperperson) receive someformofaccommodation.Yetover1in3whoidentifiedaneedforlong-term experience 2or3ofthevulnerabilityconditions(domesticfamilyviolence,mentalhealth male servicecyclers(comparedwithfemales)weremorelikelytoneedandbeprovided Service cyclers People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Major cities andreportedtheywerelivingalone

Service cyclers 4 4

38 Service cyclers 4. 3. 2. 1. Percentagesmaynotalwaysaddto100duerounding. Notes Of the8,800servicecyclerclientsin2011–12: People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Data areunweightedandbased onaselectcohortgroup;therefore,clientcountsarenotcomparable toweighteddatain For furtherinformationon All clientdemographics,exceptforIndigenousstatus,arebased onthefirstsupportperiodin2011–12.Aclientisconsidered other SHSCpublications. problematic drugand/oralcoholusepleaseseeBox1: Indigenous if,atanytimewithinthereportingperiod,theyidentified asbeingofAboriginaland/orTorresStraitIslanderorigin. • higherformalesthanfemales(43%comparedwith22%). Almost one-third (62% comparedwith14%ofmales). • femalesweremuchmorelikelytoeverreportexperiencingdomesticorfamilyviolence 4 in10 • • services in 7 in10 25% offemales. males comparedwith Indigenous Over 1in5 Over half • Over • More thanhalf ever compared with25%). in males tobereceivingservices (74% comparedwith67%) services in females tobereceiving females weremorelikelythan males weremorelikelythan (57% comparedwith51%). higher formalesthanfemales(47%comparedwith39%). overall, malesweremorelikelythanfemalestoeverreporthavingamentalhealthissue Regional experiencingdomesticorfamilyviolence, 2 in5 (40%) (70%) werereceiving were Major cities (43%) : 17%of (21%) were areas(29% Major cities ever (54%) female reportedhaving ever (32%) reported ever : (54%)

ever Ever

reported

flags.

having amentalhealthdiagnosis experienced domesticorfamilyviolence 15–24 years having amentalhealthissue problematic drugand/oralcoholuse ever reportingamentalhealthissueor • • one child 30% Almost to aSHSforassistancein2011–12. labour forceupontheirfirstpresentation unemployed and49%werenotinthe 7% • • • with malesgenerallyolderthanfemales: Almost one-third (47% comparedwith10%). least onechild to reporttheywerelivingwithat (64% comparedwith33%) to reporttheywerelivingalone 8% offemales. females females females weremorelikelythanmales males weremorelikelythanfemales 50 yearsandover:16%ofmales, 25–49 years:59%ofmales,56% 15–24 years:24%ofmales,37% were were

half employed : living withatleast (47%)

(31%) : : were livingalone , 44%were were aged15–24 ever : .

reporting

, reasons reported. may havehadonthereporting ofreasonsforseekingassistance,likely increasing therangeof It isalsoimportanttonotetheimpactthatincreased frequencyofcontactforservicecyclers once inthereportingperiod.Thereasonsanalysed herereferto They mayhaveidentifiedthesamereasonon more thanoneoccasion,however,itisonlycaptured of thesereasonsatanypointcontactwithSHS agenciesacrossthe4yearperiodinthisstudy. It isimportanttonotethat,aswithpersistentservice users,servicecyclersmayhaveidentifiedany When approachingSHSagencies,clientsmayidentify anumberofreasonsforseekingassistance. Why didservicecyclersseek assistance? cyclers (25%)reportednoneofthesevulnerabilitiescomparedwith10%persistentserviceusers. issue, or conditions (definedas reporting thisissue(54%).Twoin5(40%)servicecyclersexperienced Mental healthwasthemostfrequentlyreportedvulnerabilitybyservicecyclerswithoverhalf Figure 15:Vulnerabilities,servicecyclers(%) Note: Includes allservicecyclers2011–12to2014–15. ever reportingproblematicdrugand/oralcoholuse)(Figure15).One-quarterofservice 54 People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients ever reportingdomesticorfamilyviolence, 16% 25 15% 13% 10% all ever reasonsforseekingassistance. two ormore reportingamentalhealth 5% 3% 15% vulnerability 32 40

Service cyclers 4 4

40 Service cyclers housing affordabilitystress (41%)(Figure17). Financial difficultieswere thehighestreportedreasonforseekingassistance (66%)followedby Three-quarters (75%)ofservicecyclersalsosought assistancefromSHSagenciesforfinancialissues. Service cyclersalsosoughtassistance forfinancialissues accommodation issuesasareasonforseekingassistance(83%,comparedwith77%). Male servicecyclersweremorelikelythanfemaletoreportalltypesof accommodation ending(44%)(Figure16). for housingcrisis(58%),inadequateorinappropriatedwellingconditions(46%)previous cyclers soughtassistancefromSHSagencieswasforaccommodationissues(80%),morespecifically, As withothercohortsinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation,themostcommonreasonservice issues Service cyclersmostcommonlysoughtassistanceforaccommodation People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Figure 16:Accommodationissueskeyreasonforseekingassistance,servicecyclers(%) • • for: assistance than Young clients Source: Previous accommodation Inadequate/inappropriate prior accommodation ending ending accommodation prior 54%) with compared (59% crisis housing (47% compared with 37%). with (47% compared older clients clients older SupplementarytableS.REASONS.11. dwelling conditions Housing crisis Housing (aged 15–24) likely more were Reason (aged 50 and over) to seek toseek over) (aged and 50 ended 0

1 0 2 0 conditions (54% compared with 45%). with compared (54% conditions dwelling inappropriate or inadequate for clients non-Indigenous clients Indigenous 3 0 P er c en t 4 0 were more likely than than likely more were 5 0 to seek assistance assistance toseek All service cyclers service All Females Males 6 0 7 0 family breakdown(43%)(Figure18). (compared with74%ofpersistentserviceusers). Themostcommonreasonwasforrelationship/ Overall, almost2in3(64%)servicecyclerssought assistancewithinterpersonalrelationships relationships Service cyclersalsosoughtassistance forissueswithinterpersonal assistance, maleswerearoundtwiceaslikelytoreportthesereasonsfemales. less likelythanfinancialdifficultiesorhousingaffordabilitystresstobecitedasareasonfor seeking While unemployment(24%),employmentdifficulties(12%)andproblematicgambling(2%)were Figure 17:Financialissuesasareasonforseekingassistance,servicecyclers(%) difficulties (66% compared with 60%). with (66%compared difficulties clients clients Older • • for: assistance than Young clients Source: Employment difficulties employment difficulties difficulties compared (13% employment 20%) with compared (25% unemployment with 7%). with Problematic gambling Financial difficulties older clients older SupplementarytableS.REASONS.11. affordability stress affordability to seek assistance for financial financial for assistance toseek Unemployment were more likely than than likely more were (aged 15–24) likely more were Housing Reason People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients (aged 50 and over) to seek toseek over) (aged and 50 0 1 0 younger younger 2 0 3 0 with 64%). with compared (69% difficulties financial for than Non-Indigenous P er Indigenous clients Indigenous 4 c 0 en t 5 0 clients were more likely likely more were clients 6 to seek assistance assistance toseek 0 All service cyclers service All Females Males 7 0

8 0

Service cyclers 4 4

42 Service cyclers (lower thanforpersistentserviceusersat70%)(Figure 19). Half (50%)ofservicecyclersapproachedSHSagencies forassistancewithhealthormedicalissues Service cyclersalsosoughtassistanceforissues categorisedas‘health/medical’or‘other’reasons. Other reasonsforservicecyclersto seekassistance seeking assistance(comparedwith10%ofmales). females interpersonal relationshipsasareasonforseekingassistancefromSHSagencies.While62%of Female servicecyclersweremorelikelythanmalecyclerstoreportallaspectsof People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

Figure 18:Interpersonalrelationshipsasareasonforseekingassistance,servicecyclers(%) • • • for: assistance than Young clients Source: Relationship/family breakdown Relationship/family domestic and family violence violence family and domestic situation family/other from out time breakdown relationship/family (39% compared with 16%). with compared (39% 17%) with compared (37% 23%) with compared (59% Domestic and family violence older clients older SupplementarytableS.REASONS.11. ever reportedexperiencingdomesticorfamilyviolence,56%thisasareasonfor Time out from family/ from out Time Non-family violence Non-family (aged 15–24) likely more were other situation Sexual abuse (aged 50 and over) to seek toseek over) (aged and 50 Reason 0

1 0 2 0 than than Indigenous • • for: assistance time out from family/other situation situation family/other from out time violence family and domestic (34% compared with 24%). with compared (34% 33%) with (45% compared non-Indigenous clients non-Indigenous P er 3 c 0 en

clients t were more likely likely more were 4 0 All service cyclers service All Females Males to seek toseek 5 0

6 0 substance use(29%formales,comparedwith13%females). assistance fromaSHSagency,withthegreatestdifferencereportedforproblematicdrugand/or Males weremorelikelythanfemalestoreportallhealth/medicalissuesasareasonforseeking Figure 19:Health/medicalissuesasareasonforseekingassistance,servicecyclers(%) with 12%).with (17% abuse compared substance or drug clients Younger clients • • • for: assistance seek than likely clients Older Source: Problematic alcohol useProblematic alcohol problematic alcohol use (17% use alcohol compared problematic 14%) with compared (38% issues medical compared (34% issues health mental with 10%).with 27%) with Mental healthMental issues SupplementarytableS.REASONS.11. to seek assistance for problematic problematic for assistance toseek or substance use substance or Problematic drug Medical issues Medical younger clients younger (aged 50 and over) were more more were over) (aged and 50 Reason were more likely than than likely more were People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients 0 (aged 15–24) to older

with 24%). with compared (35% issues health mental for than clients Non-Indigenous 15%).(18% with compared use alcohol problematic for assistance than Indigenous Per cent Indigenous clients Indigenous clients non-Indigenous 20

clients were more likely likely more were 30 to seek assistance assistance toseek were more likely likely more were All service cyclers service All Females Males to seek toseek

Service cyclers 4 4

44 Service cyclers • legal information (39% compared with 28%). with compared (39% information • legal 26%) with compared (48% assistance • family/relationship 7%) with compared (48% violence domestic/family for • assistance to need: males than likely more were females comparison, In 39%). with compared (48% facilities • laundry/shower 46%) with compared (54% • meals to need: females than likely more were Males (51%).development skills/personal living and (54%), information (57%), financial transport needed: also cyclers service ofall (83%), half Over (70%). aid/brokerage material and (96%), advocacy/liaison advice/information were of these common most the cyclers, service For service’. ‘general as a classified 1service least at needed 99%) or of8,793 clients out (8,722 cyclers service all virtually accommodation, emergency or inshort-term cohorts other with As ‘General services’arealsocommonlyneededbyservicecyclers cyclers requiringthisassistance. Service cyclersalsoneededassistancetosustainhousingtenure,withoverhalf(56%)ofservice provision, notablycontinuationofshort-termoremergencyaccommodation(75%comparedwith61%). Indigenous clientsweremorelikelythannon-Indigenoustoneedalltypesofaccommodation 58% ofolderclients). Long-term housingwasagainmostcommonlyrequestedbyyoungerclients(63%comparedwith 56% ofolderclients),followedbymediumterm/transitionalhousing(66%comparedwith46%). accommodation wasrequestedmorefrequentlybyyoungerservicecyclers(62%comparedwith (aged 50andover)(90%comparedwith79%).Continuationofprovisionshort-termoremergency (aged 15–24)weremorelikelytoneedassistancewithaccommodationthanolderservicecyclers While servicecyclersingeneralhadahighneedforaccommodationservices,younger (64% comparedwith57%ofmales). medium-term/transitional housing(60%comparedwith54%ofmales)andlong-term accommodation (66%comparedwith61%offemales).Femalesweremorelikelytoneed Males weremorelikelytoneedcontinuationofprovisionshort-termoremergency Over half(57%)ofservicecyclersreportedaneedformediumterm/transitionalhousing. short-term oremergencyaccommodation(63%),whileover3in5(61%)neededlong-termhousing. (87%) needingthisservice.Servicecyclersmostcommonlyrequestedcontinuationofprovision Accommodation wastheservicemostcommonlyrequestedbycyclers,withalmost9in10 Service cyclersaremostlikelytoneedaccommodationprovision health andmedicalservicesprofessionalorlegalservices. range frombasicsupportandassistancethroughtomorecomplexspecialistservicessuchas other servicesareofferedthattargetunderlyingbarrierstosustainablehousing.These While thefocusofSHSsupportisonprovidingstablehousingorassistingclientstoremainhoused, What servicesdidservicecyclersneed? People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

11% ofolder servicecyclers). A greaterproportionof younger servicecyclersneededspecialistcounselling (19%comparedwith services (22%compared with12%)andotherspecialisedservices(30%compared with23%). Female servicecyclerswere morelikelythanmaleservicecyclerstoneed specialistcounselling • almost1in5(17%)neededspecialistcounsellingservices. • around1in4(27%)neededotherspecialisedservices • over1in3(35%)neededhealth/medicalservices specialised services.Almosthalf(49%)ofallservicecyclersneededatleast1theseservices(Figure20): ‘Other’ specialistservicesincludeshealth/medicalservices,counsellingandother Service cyclersalsoneed‘other’specialistservices 28%). with compared (36% violence domestic/family for • assistance (51% facilities 42%) with • laundry/shower compared 55%) with (66% compared • transport to: relating services general to need cyclers service non-Indigenous than likely more were cyclers service Indigenous 13%). with compared (34% assistance • employment 12%) with compared (40% assistance • educational 22%) with compared (50% assistance • family/relationship to: relating services general to need (aged over) and 50 cyclers (aged 15–24) service older than likely cyclers more were Younger service Source: Figure 20:Needs—otherspecialistservices,servicecyclers(%) All service cyclers service All Non-Indigenous SupplementarytableS.SCNEEDS.16. Younger (15-24) Older (50+) Older Indigenous Females Males Health/medical services Health/medical People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients 0 5 10 S pe ci al 15 is t co un Per cent se 20 l in g se rv ic 25 es O th 30 er s pe ci al 35 is ed s er vi ce 40 45

Service cyclers 4 4

46 Service cyclers emergency accommodation (81%compared with76%). with 49%),whileolderclients weremorelikelytocontinuebeprovided withshort-termor service cyclers(aged50 and over)tobeprovidedmedium-term/transitional housing(62%compared Younger servicecyclers (aged 15–24)whoneededaccommodationwere morelikelythanolder compared with52%ofmales). In comparison,femalesweremorelikelytoreceive mediumterm/transitionalhousing(60% cyclers tocontinuereceivingshort-termoremergency accommodation(84%comparedwith77%). Of thosewhoneededaccommodation,maleservice cyclersweremorelikelythanfemaleservice • 61%neededlong-termhousing,providedto18%ofthosewhoit. • • SHS agencyforassistance.Oftheseclients(Figure21): Around 9in10(87%)servicecyclersidentifiedaneedforaccommodationwhentheyapproached short-term oremergencyaccommodation Service cyclersweremorelikelytocontinuebeprovidedwith directly toclients,oriftheyareunableprovideassistance,mayreferthemanotherservice. specialised servicessuchascounsellingorlegalsupport.Theagencymayprovidethese Services availabletoclientsrangefromprovidingaccommodation,suchasabedinshelter, What serviceswereprovidedtoservicecyclers? People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients to 80%ofthosewhoneededit 57% neededmedium-term/transitionalhousing,providedto56%ofthosewhoit 63% neededcontinuedprovisionofshort-termoremergencyaccommodation;anditwasprovided Sources: Figure 21:Accommodationserviceprovision,cyclers(%)

All service cyclers service All cyclers service All cyclers service All SupplementarytablesS.SCPROVIDED.17,SCREFERRED.18, GAP.19. Females Females Females Males Males Males 0 1 0 2 0 Short-term or emergencyShort-term accommodation Medium-term/transitional housing Medium-term/transitional Provided 3 0 Long-term housing Long-term 4 0 Per cent Referred 5 0 6 0 Neither 7 0 8 0 9 0

1 0

and assistancefortrauma (83%comparedwith78%). provided withassistance fordomesticorfamilyviolence(91%femalescompared with74%males), of personalbelongings(96% comparedwith89%).Femalesweremorelikely thanmalestobe Males were more likely than females to be provided with assistance for the retrieval/storage/removal • transport:neededby57%,providedto97%of thosewhoneededit. • meals:neededby49%,providedto97%ofthose whoneededit • laundry/showerfacilities:neededby43%,provided to98%ofthosewhoneededit • advocacy/liaisononbehalfofclient:neededby 83%,providedto99%ofthosewhoneededit • advice/information:neededby96%,provided to 100%ofthosewhoneededit service’. The5mostcommonservicesneededand commonlyprovidedinclude: Almost allservicecyclers(99%,or8,722clients)requiredatleast1categorisedasa‘general Provision ofgeneralservices 2. 1. Baseisthoseclientswhoidentifiedaneedfortheseservices. Notes service cyclers,bysex(%) Table cyclers,alsohadahigherprovisionofmentalhealthservices(62%comparedwith53%)(Table9). service more likelytobeprovidedthisservicethanfemales(49%).Malecyclers,comparedwithfemale Of thoseservicecyclerswhoidentifiedaneedfordrugoralcoholcounselling,males(59%)were alcohol counsellingandmentalhealthservices Male servicecyclersweremorelikelytobeprovidedwithdrugand clients whoneededthisassistance(56%or4,900clients),89%receivedit. take theformofmediationorliaisonserviceswithhousematesand/orrealestateagents.Ofthose Around half(56%)ofservicecyclersneededassistancetosustainhousingtenure.Thiscan medium-term/transitional housing(58%comparedwith47%). Non-Indigenous servicecyclersweremorelikelythanIndigenoustobeprovidedwith Mental health health Mental Drug and alcohol counselling Service Data areunweightedandbasedonaselectcohortgroup;therefore,clientcountsnotcomparabletoweighteddata in otherSHSCpublications. Mental health services health Mental services Psychiatric services Psychological 9: DrugandalcoholcounsellingmentalhealthservicesprovidedbySHS, People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients 48% 69% 69% 62% 62% 51%

40% 43% 53% 49% 49% 52%

Service cyclers 4 4

48 Service cyclers There weredifferences,however,inthetypeofaccommodationneeded(Table10andFigure21). The overallservicegapinaccommodationwassimilarformaleservicecyclersandfemalecyclers. accommodation werenotprovidedwithorreferredtoanagencyforthesehousingsolutions. is low(7%).Despitethis,over1in3(35%)servicecyclerswhoidentifiedaneedforlongerterm that theproportionofservicecyclersnotprovidedorreferredsomeformaccommodationoverall with theextendedperiodoftimeservicecyclersareengagedservices,itisperhapsunsurprising The needforaccommodationwashighservicecyclers(87%).Thislevelofcombined long-term housing The largestgapinserviceprovisionforcyclersis agency fortheservice. identified asneedingbuteitherdidnotreceivefromthatserviceortheywerereferredtoanother available data)theextenttowhichneedshavebeenmet.Unmetareservicesthataclient Some needsarisemorethanonceinasupportperiodandthismakesitdifficulttoassess(from the Clients receivingsupportfromSHSagenciesoftenidentifyasneedingawiderangeofservices. What arethegapsinserviceprovision? legal services(39%),psychological(34%),andpsychiatric(30%). most frequentlyreferredservicewasforlong-termhousing(48%).Thisfollowedbyprofessional appointment oraninterview.OfallservicecyclerswhoneededassistancefromSHSagencies,the service providerandincludesinformationonwhetherthatserviceacceptstheclientforan information aboutreferralsfromanagency.Thisisareferralfortheclienttoattendalternative Along withinformationaboutaclient’sneedsandtheprovisionofservices,SHSCalsocollects Referral ofservice assistance foreducational(82%comparedwith75%). Non-Indigenous servicecyclersweremorelikelythanIndigenoustobeprovided (84% comparedwith79%). receive assistancefordomestic/familyviolence(93%comparedwith85%)andtrauma Older servicecyclers(aged50andover)weremorelikelythanyounger15–24)to People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

for mental health services overall (13%), compared with female service cyclers (18%). cyclers (13%), overall service female with compared services health mental for areferral or assistance receive not did cyclers service of male proportion low arelatively Overall, 2. 1. Baseisthoseclientswhoidentifiedaneedfortheseservices. Notes Table 11:Mentalhealthservicesnotprovidedorreferred,servicecyclers,bysex(%) overall (Table11). Less than1in5(15%)servicecyclersdidnotreceiveassistanceorareferralformentalhealthservices for servicecyclers There isalsoagapinservicedeliveryforsomementalhealthservices were neitherprovidednorreferred,comparedwith21%ofnon-Indigenousservicecyclers). was greaterforthoseneedingmedium-term/transitionalhousing(25%ofIndigenousservicecyclers Of thoseIndigenousandnon-Indigenousservicecyclersneedingaccommodation,thegap with 26%)andshort-termoremergencyaccommodation(14%compared9%). to haveagapinserviceprovisionforlong-termhousing(36%notprovidedorreferred,compared Younger servicecyclers(aged15–24)weremorelikelythanolder50andover) 2. 1. Baseisthoseclientswhoidentifiedaneedfortheseservices. Notes service cyclers,bysex(%) Table 10:Accommodationservicesnotprovidedorreferredtoclientswhoidentifiedaneed, Mental health services overall services health Mental types accommodation All Data areunweightedandbased onaselectcohortgroup;therefore,clientcountsarenotcomparable toweighteddata Data areunweightedandbasedonaselectcohortgroup;therefore,clientcountsnotcomparabletoweighteddatain other SHSCpublications. in otherSHSCpublications. Mental health services health Mental services Psychiatric services Psychological housing Long-term housing transitional Medium-term/ accommodation or emergency Short-term People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients All service cyclers service All 24% 17% 15% 21% All service cyclers service All 22% 35% 10% 7% 22% 13% 13% 21% 37% 25% 9% 7% 28% 18% 21% 21% 20% 32% 12% 8%

Service cyclers 4 4

50 Service cyclers reporting period, with 74% of females having 1–4 support periods, compared with 67% for males. males. for 67% with compared periods, 74% support 1–4 with having offemales period, reporting 4year the across intotal periods support fewer to have likely more were cyclers service Female support periods(Figure22). of thestudy.About1in20(6%)had10–19supportperiods,andveryfew(1%)morethan The vastmajorityofservicecyclers(93%)hadbetween1and9supportperiodsoverthe4years accessing SHSforassistanceinmorethan1financialyearofthereportingperiod. periods perclientforpersistentserviceusersandcyclersis,inpart,duetothesecohorts persistent serviceusersandonly2%oftransitoryusers.Thehighernumbersupport one-quarter (29%)ofservicecyclershad5ormoresupportperiods,comparedwith73% per person)thantransitoryserviceusers,yetmuchlowerpersistentusers.Over Service cyclersweremorelikelytohavefrequentcontact(highernumbersofsupportperiods support periodsintotal,similarto18,000forfemaleservicecyclers. about 35,800supportperiodsduringthistime.Ofthese,maleservicecyclersreceived17,800 Across the4yearsto30June2015,therewere8,800servicecyclersandtheseclientsreceived Number ofsupportperiods on thehousingoutcomesofclientscanbeinferred. accommodation. Inusingtheseproxies,theimpactthathigherlevelsofsupport(orcontact)have periods aclientreceives,thelengthofthosesupportperiods,daysandnights of proxymeasuresprovideinformationonengagementwithSHSincluding:thenumbersupport There isnosinglemeasuretoassessthelevelofserviceengagementbyaclient,insteadnumber How doservicecyclersengagewithservices? People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Source: Figure 22:Numberofsupportperiods,servicecyclers(%)

All service cyclers service All Younger (15 SupplementarytableS.SUPPORT.24. Non-Indigenous Older (50+) Older Indigenous Females Males – 24) 0 10 20 1 to9 30 40 Per cent 10 to19 50 60 20 or more 70 80 90 100

they mayoccuratanypoint (supportperiod)overthe4yearsofstudy. than males(Figure24).It isimportanttonotethatthesedaysofsupport maynotbeconsecutive, more (or1yearormore).Femaleswerelikely toreceiveahighernumberofdayssupport reporting period,andalmost1in3(31%)service cyclersreceivedmorethan365daysofsupportor Almost 2in5(39%)servicecyclersreceivedbetween 91and365daysofsupportacrossthe4-year Days ofsupport 23%). with compared (35% ofreporting 4years the during of 1day support just to have (aged 15–24) cyclers service younger than likely more (aged were over) and 50 cyclers service Older males (Figure23). Almost 1in3(31%)supportperiodsforfemaleslastedmorethan90days,comparedwith22% For males,half(50%)ofsupportperiodswerefor7daysorless,comparedwith41%females. Of the35,800supportperiodsforservicecyclers,almosthalf(45%)lastedbetween1and7days. Length ofsupportperiods (16% 10%).clients with compared Indigenous than period 1support only received to have likely more were clients Non-Indigenous 17%). with compared (22% ofreporting 4years the across period 1support just to have (aged 15–24) cyclers service younger than likely more (aged were over) and 50 cyclers service Older cyclers. service 5% offemale with compared periods, 10 had support more or cyclers 1in 10 almost (9%) service male Comparatively, Figure 23:Lengthofsupportperiod,servicecyclers(%) Source:

More than 365 days 365 than More SupplementarytableS.SUPPORT.25. 61–365 days 61–365 8–60 days 8–60 1–7 days 1–7 People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients 0 10 20 P er 30 c en t 40 All service cyclers service All Females Males 50 60

Service cyclers 4 4

52 Service cyclers of timeinsupport(Figure25). of thereportingperiodinsupport.Lessthan110(6%)servicecyclersspentbetween50%and 75% days) ofthereportingperiodinsupport,whileanother25%spentbetweenone-quarterandone-half More thantwo-thirds(69%)ofallservicecyclersspentuptoone-quarter(forexample,365 People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Figure 24:Numberofdaysclientreceivedsupport,servicecyclers(%) Source: Figure 25:Proportionoftimespentinsupport,servicecyclers(%) Source:

All service cyclers service All SupplementarytableS.SUPPORT.25. SupplementarytableS.SUPPORT.25. Females Males 25% 0 6% 1 0 61–90 days 61–90 days 2–7 2 0 69% 3 0 4 0 91–365 days 91–365 days 8–30 P er 5 c 0 en t 51 U 26 p 6 – – t 0 75% o 50% 25% ( More than 365 days 365 than More days 31–60 ( 731 t 366– 7 ( 0 u p t o 730 d o

1095 d 365d 8 0 ays ays ays ) ) ) 9 0 1 0 while afurther32%receivedaccommodationin 2ofthe4years. One in10(10%)servicecyclersreceivedaccommodation in3ofthe4yearsreportingperiod, transitional housing,and9%receivedanynights ofaccommodationinlong-termhousing. In comparison,lessthanone-third(31%)received anynightsofaccommodationinmedium-term/ Half ofallservicecyclers(50%)receivedatleast 1 nightofshort-termoremergencyaccommodation. service cyclers(22%comparedwith15%,respectively,for241nightsormore). non-Indigenous servicecyclerstendedtoreceivemoreaccommodationnightsthanIndigenous any accommodationacrossthe4-yearreportingperiod(29%comparedwith23%).However, Non-Indigenous servicecyclersweremorelikelythanIndigenousnottoreceive to notreceiveanynightsofaccommodation(38%comparedwith26%). Older servicecyclers(aged50andover)weremorelikelythanyounger15–24) of accommodation(23%comparedwith17%). A higherproportionoffemaleservicecyclersthanmalereceived241ormorenights in total)overthe4-yearstudyperiod(Figure26). (44%) servicecyclersreceivedbetween31and480nightsofaccommodation(or116months Over 1in10(11%)servicecyclersreceived1–10nightsofaccommodationonly.Morethan25 Nights ofaccommodation Figure 26:Nightsofaccommodation,servicecyclers(%) Source: 1 1 2 2 3 P 5 0 5 0 5 0 0 er

accommodation Supplementary tableS.SUPPORT.25. c en t

No No People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

1–10 nights

11–30 nights

nights 31–60 31–60

nights 61–120

121–240 nights

241–480 241–480 nights

481+ nights

Service cyclers 4 4

54 Service cyclers Table 12:Repeatepisodesofhomelessness,servicecyclers(%) component toexitinghomelessnessformanyclients. to housedandthenhomelessagainatleastonceduringthistime.Thishighlightsthe‘journey’ 2011–12 and2014–15(Table12).Thismeanstheclienthadtransitionedfrombeinghomeless, Over one-quarter(26%)ofservicecyclersexperiencedrepeatepisodeshomelessnessbetween Repeat episodesofhomelessness of supportduring2011–12totheirhousingsituationattheendstudyperiod,30June2015. the reportingperiod;instead,theycompareclient’shousingsituationatstartoftheirfirst period the courseof4yearsreportingperiod.Thedatapresentedheredonotreflectchangeswithin combination ofboth.Clientsmayalsohavehadanumberchangesintheirhousingsituationover while othersmayhavehadmoresupportperiodsofashorterduration.Others few as2tomany1,096.Clientsmayhavehadsupportperiodsrelativelylonginlength, of supportperiodsvariedamongclients,andthetotalnumberofdaysinspannedfromas their firstsupportperiodtotheendofreportingperiod,30June2015.Thenumberandlength The housingoutcomespresentedherelookatchangesinaclient’ssituationfromthebeginningof What arethehousingoutcomesforservicecyclers? People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Repeat homelessness Indigenous status Indigenous Age sex Service cyclers Service repeat homelessness 20% homelessness 32% repeat homelessness 25% homelessness 32% homelessness 26% 26% 26% of non-Indigenous clients experienced experienced clients non-Indigenous of of females experienced repeat repeat experienced females of homelessness repeat experienced males of homelessness repeat experienced of clients aged 15–24 experienced repeat repeat 15–24 aged experienced clients of repeat experienced clients Indigenous of of clients aged 50 and over experienced experienced over and 50 aged clients of Table 13:Housingoutcomesattheendoflastknownsupportperiod,servicecyclers For aboutone-fifth(21%,or1,800)ofservicecyclers,theirhousingsituationwasunknown(Table 13). • morethan1in3(36%,or3,100)servicecyclerswerehomeless: • over2in5(44%,or3,800)servicecyclerswerehoused: Looking attheendoflastclosedsupportperiodallservicecyclers: 6% ofservicecyclerswereinongoingSHSsupport,muchlowerthanpersistentusers(29%). At thestartofstudyperiod,allclientswerehomeless.end30June2015, and theconditionsofoccupancy. To determineaclient’shousingsituation,3aspectsareconsidered:dwellingtype,tenure, At thebeginningandendofeachsupportperiod,housingsituationclientisrecorded. for servicecyclers? What isthehousingsituationatendoflastclosedsupportperiod – 5%(or470)werecouchsurfingorwithnotenure. – 26%(or2,200)werelivinginshort-termoremergencyaccommodation – 5%(or430)hadnoshelter(roughsleeping)orinanimproviseddwelling – 2%(or200)werelivinginaninstitutionalsetting. – 19%(or1,700)wereinprivateotherhousing – 23%(or2,000)werelivinginpublicorcommunityhousing Housing situationattheendofsupportandclientpercentage emergency accommodation Couch surferornotenure Rough sleeper Short-term or Homeless 26% 5% 5% People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

Institutional settings community housing Private housing Public or Housed 19% 23% 2%

Unknown Unknown 21% ?

Service cyclers 4 4

56 Service cyclers 30 June2015. It ispossiblethattheseclients re-engagedwithSHSagenciesandsought furtherassistanceafter outcome forover1in5 (21%)servicecyclerswasunknownattheendofthereportingperiod. one-third (36%)ofthiscohort remainedhomelessattheendofstudyperiod.Thehousing However, engagementwithSHSdoesnotmean animmediateendtohomelessness,andover had engagedwithSHSforaperiodofbetween2 and3years,morethan2in5(44%)werehoused. considered tobe‘homeless’.Bytheendoftheir last knownsupportperiod,whenservicecyclers At thestartofstudyperiod(2011–12)allthose inshort-termoremergencyaccommodationwere accommodation clients. This againhighlightsthe‘journey’natureofexiting homelessnessformanyshort-termoremergency compared toalmost3in5(59%)persistentservice usersandonly3%fortransitoryserviceusers. being housedtohomelessnessagainatleastonce inthe4yearsofreportingperiod.Thisis more thanonceduringthereportingperiod.Thatis,theyhadtransitionedfromhomelessnessto user cohort,butstillnotable.Overone-quarter(26%)ofservicecyclersexperiencedhomelessness Repeat episodesofhomelessnesswerelowerforservicecyclersthanthepersistent double thatofpersistentserviceusers. one-quarter (29%)didnotreceiveanynightsofaccommodationduringthereportingperiod;almost than olderservicecyclers.Despitethehighestneedforcyclersbeingaccommodation,over inappropriate dwellingconditions.Youngerservicecyclersweremorelikelytoreportthesereasons reason thatservicecyclerssoughtassistancefromSHS—primarilyhousingcrisisorinadequate or As withothercohortsinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation,accommodationwasthekey (17%) transitoryserviceusers. and/or alcoholuse,comparedwitharound3in5(62%)persistentserviceusersandlessthan1 in 5 the 3vulnerabilityconditions:domesticorfamilyviolence,mentalhealthissue,problematicdrug aged 15–34andwerelivingalone.Around4in10(40%)servicecyclersexperiencedatleast2of persistent serviceusersandtransitoryusers,themajorityofcyclerswerefemale, for justover4in10(43%)ofallthoseshort-termoremergencyaccommodation.Similarto The servicecyclercohortwassimilarinsizetothetransitoryuserscohort,accounting What doesthistellus? • • • People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients service cyclers. to beinprivateorotherhousing(12%comparedwith24%). younger clientstobeinpublicorcommunityhousing(30%comparedwith20%),thoughlesslikely housed attheendoftheirsupport(45%comparedwith44%).Olderclientsweremorelikelythan of theirsupport. emergency accommodationand8%weresleepingroughorinanimproviseddwellingattheend support period(44%comparedwith28%).Almost1in3(32%)maleswereshort-termor the otherhand,weremorelikelythanfemalestobehomelessatendoftheirlastclosed or communityhousingand22%werelivinginprivateotherhousing.Maleservicecyclers,on support period(50%comparedwith36%).Morethan1in4females(27%)werelivingpublic Overall, therewaslittledifferenceinhousingoutcomesbetweenIndigenousandnon-Indigenous Younger servicecyclers(aged15–24)wereequallylikelyasolderclients50andover)tobe Female servicecyclersweremorelikelythanmalestobehousedattheendoftheirlastclosed

* know whyshedidn’t. they hadfoundherapublichousingplace,butshenevermovedin.Tothisday,doesn’t Natalie isstillkickingherselfformessinguplasttimeshehadsoughthelpfromaSHSagency— bags willeverend. would beatthisstageofherlife,andwondersifthecyclehomelessnesspacking money togetherforsomethingmorepermanent.Sheisdefinitelynotwhereshethought in andoutofhostels,crisissheltersboardinghousesbecauseshecouldnevergetenough many daysbecauseshehadbeentoo‘down’togetoutofbed.Overthe2years, every timeoneofherbossessaidthis,butsheknewthattheywereright.Shehadmissedtoo unemployed onandofffor2yearsbecauseshewas‘toounreliable’.Shehadwantedtoprotest Natalie*, 34,looksatthecollectionofbillsontableandtearswellinhereyes.Shehasbeen Case study2:Servicecycler to stereotypehomelessnessclients. present anexampleofa‘typical’short-termoremergencyaccommodationservicecycler;itisnottheintentionAIHW This casestoryisnotbasedonanactualperson.Itde-identifieddatacollatedfromtheSHSC.intendedto People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients 57

Service cyclers 4 5

58 Transitory service users 30 June2012,anddidnot presentagainpriorto30June2015. That istheypresentedtoanagencyforassistance atleastoncebetween1July2011and clients whopresentedtoSHSagenciesforassistance inonlythefirstfinancialyearofstudy. There werearound8,700transitoryserviceusers in2011–12.Transitoryserviceusersarethose Who aretransitoryservice users? 5 People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients • • themostcommonreasonforseekingassistancewasaccommodationissues • mostwerereceivingservicesin • themajorityoftransitoryserviceuserswerefemale • mosttransitoryserviceuserswereaged15–34 Consistent withthebroadergroupofthoseinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation: comprised 8,700clientsandwasequalinsizetoservicecyclers. 30 June2012,butdidnotreceiveanysupportbetween1July2012and2015.Thiscohort Transitory serviceusersareclientswhohadatleast1supportperiodbetweenJuly2011and Key findings of almost1in5(18%,or1,600)unknown. transitory serviceusercohortremainedhomeless(60%,or5,200)withthehousingsituation the following3yearsnoneoftheseclientsreturnedtoSHSforassistance.Themajority homelessness. Within1year,22%(or1,900)ofthiscohortwereassistedintohousingandin When transitoryserviceusersfirstsoughtassistancein2011–12,allclientswereexperiencing • leastlikelytoreceiveanynightsofaccommodation. • • • Transitory serviceusers,whencomparedwithpersistentusersandcyclerswere: • support, and37%received10daysorfewer these clientsdidnotreceiveanyaccommodationservices experiencing domesticorfamilyviolence seeking assistance,includingdomesticandfamilyviolence. unemployment males weremorelikelythanfemalestoseekassistanceforfinancialdifficulties,including more likelytohaveonly1supportperiod:overone-quarterofclientsreceivedday less likelytoreceiveaccommodation:where3in4neededaccommodation,over110of less likelyto females weremorelikelythanmalestoreportinterpersonalrelationshipsasakeyreasonfor Transitory serviceusers ever reporthavingamentalhealthissue,problematicdrugand/oralcoholuseor Major cities andreportedtheywerelivingalone

4. 3. 2. 1. Percentagesmaynotalwaysaddto100duerounding. Notes Of the8,700transitoryserviceusersin2011–12: Data areunweightedandbased onaselectcohortgroup;therefore,clientcountsarenotcomparable toweighteddatain For furtherinformationon All clientdemographics,exceptforIndigenousstatus,arebased onthefirstsupportperiodin2011–12.Aclientisconsidered other SHSCpublications. problematic drugand/oralcoholusepleaseseeBox1: Indigenous if,atanytimewithinthereportingperiod,theyidentified asbeingofAboriginaland/orTorresStraitIslanderorigin. People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients • higherformalesthanfemales(21%comparedwith10%). 15% • similarformales(22%)andfemales(21%). More than1in5 3 in10 • • 28% • • in 7 in10 22% offemales. 14% ofmalescomparedwith Indigenous Almost 2in10 Over half ever were undertheageof35,8%aged50yearsandover. or familyviolence(46%comparedwith8%) (29% comparedwith26%). services in than malestoreceive (73% comparedwith66%) in females toreceiveservices 6 in10(60%)ofthosewho females werealmost6timesaslikelymalesto females weremorelikely males weremorelikelythan Major cities Major cities

ever ever experiencingdomesticorfamilyviolence, (30%) (69%)receivedservices reported reported having (53%)were :

Regional ever : (17%)were

(22%) reported problematic drugand/oralcoholuse areas female

ever experienced domesticorfamilyviolence Ever having amentalhealthissue

ever reported

. flags. reportedexperiencingdomesticorfamilyviolence 15–34 years having amentalhealthdiagnosis ever reportingamentalhealthissueor • • child 29% Almost half in thelabourforce. were unemployedand46%not 1 in10 • • • with malesgenerallyolderthanfemales: Almost 6in10 ever (44% comparedwith12%ofmales). report livingwithatleastonechild of females) alone (61%comparedwith36% living 10% offemales. females females females weremorelikelyto males weremorelikelytoreport 50 yearsandover:18%ofmales, 25–49 years:54%ofmales,56% 15–24 years:28%ofmales,34% were reportexperiencingdomestic : (10%) were : . living withatleastone (47%) (56%) were livingalone : employed were aged15–34 : ever , 44%

reporting

, 59

5 Transitory service users 5

60 Transitory service users relationship reasonsthanothershort-termoremergency accommodationcohorts. proportions oftransitoryservicecyclersreporting accommodation,financialissuesorinterpersonal SHS agenciesin2011–12,either1ormoresupport period.Ingeneral,therewerelower Transitory serviceusersmayhaveidentifieda number ofreasonsforseekingassistancefrom Why didtransitoryserviceusers seekassistance? This isconsistentlyhighlythanforpersistentserviceusers(10%)andcyclers(25%). or substanceabuse).Alargeproportion(47%)reportednoneofthesevulnerabilities(Figure27). as Less than1in5(17%)transitoryserviceusersexperienced The mostcommonself-reportedvulnerabilityfortransitoryserviceuserswasmentalhealth(30%). People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Figure 27:Vulnerabilities,transitoryserviceusers(%) Note: ever Includes alltransitoryserviceusers2011–12. experiencing:domesticorfamilyviolence,amentalhealthissue,anissuewithdrugs 30 14% 47 6% 7% 3% two ormore 5% 2% vulnerabilities(defined 17% 15 28

financial reasonsforseeking assistance(Figure29). problems. Financialdifficulties(46%)andhousing affordabilitystress(22%)werethemostcommon Over half(55%)oftransitoryserviceuserssought assistancefromSHSagenciesforfinancial assistance becausetheirpreviousaccommodationhadended,comparedwith25%offemaleclients. due toaccommodationissues(62%comparedwith56%).Mostnotably,30%ofmaleclientssought Male transitoryserviceusersweremorelikelythanfemaletoseekassistance (Figure 28). inadequate orinappropriatedwellingconditions(24%),andtheendofpreviousaccommodation(27%) from SHSagencies(59%).Morespecifically,clientssoughtassistanceduetohousingcrisis(33%), Accommodation issues were the most common reason for transitory service users to seek assistance accommodation orfinancialissues Transitory serviceusersmostcommonlysoughtassistancefor users (%) Figure 28: Accommodation issueskeyreasonforseekingassistance,transitoryservice accommodation categories. categories. accommodation across similar were issues accommodation for assistance sought who over) and (aged 15–24) and of proportions The Source:

Previous accommodation Inadequate/inappropriate SupplementarytableS.REASONS.11. dwelling conditions Housing crisis Housing People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients older clients older R younger clients younger ea ended so n 0 (aged 50

1 0 accommodation issues. issues. accommodation of types all for assistance to seek than likely more Overall, P er 2 c 0 non-Indigenous clients non-Indigenous en t Indigenous clients Indigenous 3 0 Males Females service users service transitory All were were

4 0 61

5 Transitory service users 5

62 Transitory service users (53% comparedwith41%)andunemployment(19%8%). assistance forfinancialreasons(63%comparedwith49%).Thisincludeddifficulties Overall, maletransitoryserviceusersweremorelikelythanfemaletoseek (Figure 29). because ofrelationship/familybreakdown(33%),followedbydomesticandfamilyviolence(21%) interpersonal relationships.Onein3transitoryserviceuserssoughtassistancefromSHSagencies Just overhalf(52%)ofalltransitoryserviceuserssoughtassistancefromSHSagenciesbecause service userssoughtassistance Interpersonal relationshipswereanothercommonreasontransitory People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Figure 29:Financialissuesasareasonforseekingassistance,transitoryserviceusers(%) (54% compared with 39%). with compared (54% difficulties financial for assistance to seek than likely more clients Older Source: Employment difficulties Problematic gambling SupplementarytableS.REASONS.11. Financial difficulties affordability stress affordability Unemployment (aged 50 years and over) were were over) and (aged years 50 Housing younger clients younger Reason 0 (aged 15–24) 1 0 2 0 than than Non-Indigenous with 42%). with compared (49% difficulties financial for P er Indigenous clients Indigenous 3 c 0 en t clients were more likely likely more were clients 4 Males Females All transitory service users service transitory All 0 to seek assistance assistance toseek 5 0

assistance (comparedwith7%formales). reported experiencingdomesticorfamilyviolence,43%thisasareasonforseeking assistance forinterpersonalrelationships(63%comparedwith35%).While46%offemales Female transitoryserviceusersweremorelikelythanmaletoseek family violence(26%)(Figure30). Relationship/family breakdown(29%)wasthemostcommonreason,followedbydomesticand Overall, half(50%)oftransitoryserviceuserssoughtassistancewithinterpersonalrelationships. interpersonal relationships Transitory serviceusersalsosoughtassistanceduetoissueswith users (%) Figure 30:Interpersonalrelationshipsasareasonforseekingassistance,transitoryservice • • • including: relationships, interpersonal for assistance toseek over) than likely more Overall, Source: domestic and family violence violence family and domestic situation family/other from out time breakdown relationship/family (25% compared with 15%). with compared (25% 12%) with (24% compared (41% 19%) with compared Relationship/family breakdown Relationship/family Domestic and family violence SupplementarytableS.REASONS.11. young clients young Time out from family/ from out Time Non-family violence Non-family People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients older clients older other situation Sexual abuse (aged 15–24) were Reason (aged 50 and (aged and 50 0

1 0 (31% compared with 26%).(31% with compared violence family and domestic including relationships, interpersonal for assistance than likely Overall, 2 0 P er Indigenous clients Indigenous c non-Indigenous clients non-Indigenous en t 3 0 Males Females All transitory service users service transitory All were more more were 4 0 to seek toseek ever

5 Transitory service users 5

64 Transitory service users period (2011–12) these clients may have reported multiple needs within 1 or several support periods. Although transitoryservice usersonlypresentedtoSHSagenciesinthe first yearofthereporting agencies offermanyotherservicestargetingunderlying barrierstosustainablehousing. While thefocusofSHSsupportisonprovidingstable housingorassistingclientstoremainhoused, What servicesdidtransitory serviceusersneed? problematic drugand/oralcoholuse(13%formales,comparedwith6%females). from SHSagenciesformosthealth/medicalreasons,withthegreatestdifferenceseenreasons of Male transitoryserviceusersweremorelikelythanfemaletoseekassistance health/medical issues.Thisincludedmentalhealthissues(16%)andmedical(11%)(Figure31). reasons. Overone-quarter(28%)oftransitoryserviceuserssoughtassistancefromSHSagenciesfor Transitory serviceusersalsosoughtassistanceforissuescategorisedashealth/medicalor‘other’ Other reasonsfortransitoryserviceuserstoseekassistance People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Figure 31:Health/medicalissuesasareasonforseekingassistance,transitoryserviceusers(%) medical issues (24% compared with 6%). with (24% compared issues medical including issues, health for assistance to seek than likely more clients Older Source: Problematic alcohol useProblematic alcohol Mental healthMental issues SupplementarytableS.REASONS.11. or substance use substance or Problematic drug Medical issues Medical (aged 50 years and over) were were over) and (aged years 50 R younger clients younger ea so n 0 (aged 15–24) (18% compared with 10%).(18% with compared issues health mental for assistance including issues, health for assistance to seek than likely more Overall, P er 1 c 0 en non-Indigenous clients non-Indigenous t Indigenous clients Indigenous Males Females All transitory service users service transitory All were were

2 0 • laundry/showerfacilities (37%comparedwith29%). • meals(40%compared with32%) • transport(41%comparedwith31%) Indigenous clientsweremorelikelythannon-Indigenous clientstoneedgeneralservicesrelatingto: • educationalassistance(17%comparedwith4%). • family/relationshipassistance(26%compared with12%) • livingskills/personaldevelopment(36%compared with19%) services relatingto: Young clients(aged15–24)weremorelikelythan olderclients(aged50andover)toneedgeneral • family/relationshipassistance(26%comparedwith13%). • assistancefordomestic/familyviolence(30%comparedwith3%) • advocacy/liaisononbehalfofclient(57%comparedwith46%) Females weremorelikelythanmalestoneed: • laundry/showerfacilities(32%comparedwith27%). • meals(35%comparedwith30%) Males weremorelikelythanfemalestoneed: and laundryfacilities(30%). brokerage (40%).Aroundone-thirdoftransitoryserviceusersneededmeals(32%),transport(31%) most commonofthesebeingadvice/information(78%),advocacy/liaison(52%)andmaterialaid/ The majorityoftransitoryserviceusers(95%or8,200clients)neededatleast1‘generalservice’, the ‘General services’arealsocommonlyneededbytransitoryserviceusers (24%) requiringthisassistance. Transitory serviceusersalsoneededassistancetosustainhousingtenure,withalmostone-quarter accommodation (58%comparedwith49%). to needaccommodation(79%comparedwith71%),includingcontinuedshort-termoremergency Indigenous transitoryserviceusersweremorelikelythannon-Indigenous (aged 50andover)toneedmedium-term/transitionalhousing(37%comparedwith26%). younger transitoryserviceusers(aged15–24)weremorelikelythanolder Females weremorelikelythanmalestoneedlong-termhousing(38%comparedwith30%),while transitory serviceusers. by long-termhousing(34%).Mediumterm/transitionalwasrequestedaround1in3(31%) provision ofshort-termoremergencyaccommodationwasrequestedmostfrequently(49%),followed was high,withalmost3in4(71%)transitoryserviceusersneedingaccommodation.Continuationof As withothercohortsinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation,theneedforanyaccommodation accommodation provision Transitory serviceusersaremostlikelytoneedservicesrelated People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients 65

5 Transitory service users 5

66 Transitory service users • 34%neededlong-termhousing,providedto14%ofthosewhoit. • 31%neededmedium-term/transitionalhousing,providedto48%ofthosewhoit. • clients (Figure32): Almost 3in4(71%)transitoryserviceusersidentifiedaneedforaccommodationservices.Ofthese short-term oremergencyaccommodation Transitory serviceusersweremostlikelytocontinuebeprovidedwith may referthemtoanotherservice. such ascounsellingorlegalsupport.Agenciesmayprovidetheseservicesdirectlytoclients,they Services availabletoclientsrangefromthedirectprovisionofaccommodationspecialisedservices What serviceswereprovidedtotransitoryserviceusers? (17% comparedwith14%). ‘other’ specialistservicesoverall(28%comparedwith22%),includinghealth/medical Female transitoryserviceusersweremorelikelythanmaletoneed specialised services(12%). included accesstohealth/medicalservices(15%),specialistcounselling(8%)andother One-quarter (25%)oftransitoryserviceusersrequiredaccessto‘other’specialistservices.This Transitory serviceusersneededaccessto‘other’specialistservices People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients 74% ofthosewhoneededit. 49% neededcontinuedprovisionofshort-termoremergencyaccommodation,itwasprovidedto Sources: Figure 32:Accommodationserviceprovision,transitoryusers(%) All transitory service users service transitory All All transitory service users service transitory All All transitory service users service transitory All SupplementarytablesS.TSUPROVIDED.21, TSUREFERRED.22,GAP.23. Females Females Females Males Males Males 0 10 Short-term or emergencyShort-term accommodation 20 Medium-term/transitional housing Medium-term/transitional Provided 30 Long-term housing Long-term 40 P er 50 c Referred en t 60 70 Neither 80 90

100 • • • • Of thoseclientswhoneededaservice: • recreation:neededby23%,providedto95%ofthosewhoit. • transport:neededby31%,providedto95%ofthosewhoit • meals:neededby32%,providedto97%ofthosewhoit • advocacy/liaisononbehalfofclient:neededby52%,providedto96%thosewhoit • advice/information:neededby78%,providedto98%ofthosewhoit • laundry/showerfacilities:neededby30%,providedto99%ofthosewhoit service provisionincluded: Overall, clientswhoneededtheseserviceswerealsolikelytoreceiveservices.Thehighest The majority(95%or8,200clients)oftransitoryserviceusersneededatleast1generalservice. Provision ofgeneralservices with 47%). health/medical services(64%comparedwith53%)andspecialistcounselling(62% female transitoryserviceuserstoreceivetheseservices(74%comparedwith67%).Thisincluded Of thosewhoneeded‘other’specialistservices,maletransitoryserviceusersweremorelikelythan with 45%). transitory serviceusersweremorelikelytoreceivetheseservicesthanfemales(52%compared Of thosetransitoryserviceuserswhoidentifiedaneedforservicesrelatingtomentalhealth,male specialised services Males weremostlikelytobeprovidedwithmentalhealthand‘other’ clients whoneededit,86%wereprovidedwiththisservice. (which canincludemediationandliaisonserviceswithroommatesrealestateagents).Ofthose Almost one-quarter(24%)oftransitoryserviceusersneededassistancetosustainhousingtenure of short-termoremergencyaccommodation(76%comparedwith70%). provided withaccommodation(72%compared67%),mostnotablyforthecontinuedprovision Overall, olderclients(aged50andover)weremorelikelythanyounger15–24)tobe (87% comparedwith79%). to beprovidedassistance forcourtsupport(78%comparedwith63%)and financialinformation with 84%) transitory serviceuserstobeprovidedassistance fordomestic/familyviolence(92%compared obtain/maintain governmentallowance(85%compared with77%) (91% femalescomparedwith77%),courtsupport (78%comparedwith66%),andassistanceto removal ofpersonalbelongings(96%compared with89%) non-Indigenous transitory serviceusersweremorelikelythanIndigenous transitoryserviceusers older (aged50andover)transitoryserviceusers weremorelikelythanyounger(aged15–24) females weremorelikelythanmalestobeprovided withassistancefordomesticorfamilyviolence males weremorelikelythanfemalestobeprovidedwithassistancefortheretrieval/storage/ People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

5 Transitory service users 5

68 Transitory service users 2. 1. Baseisthoseclientswhoidentified aneedfortheseservices. Notes transitory serviceusers,byage(%) Table 14:Accommodationservicesnotprovidedorreferredbyclientswhoidentifiedaneed, long-term housing(55%)didnotreceivetheseservices(Table14). for accommodationservices(32%comparedwith30%).Overhalfofyoungerclientswhoneeded Younger clients(aged15–24)weremorelikelythanaged25andovertohaveanunmetneed This unmetneedvariedacrossaccommodationtypes(Table14andFigure32). users werelesslikelythanpersistentserviceandcyclerstoreceiveaccommodation. neither providednorreferredtoanotheragencyforassistanceduring2011–12.Transitoryservices most likelytoneedaccommodationservices(71%),however,over1in10(13%)oftheseclients were Similar toothercohortsinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation,transitoryserviceuserswere long-term housing The largestgapinserviceprovisionfortransitoryuserswas therefore theirneedsarealsoassessedwithinthistimeperiod. to anotheragencyfortheservice.Transitoryserviceusersaccessedsupportwithin2011–12only, client identifiedasneedingbuteitherdidnotreceivefromthatserviceortheywerereferred the availabledata)extenttowhichneedshavebeenmet.Unmetareservicesthata Some needsarisemorethanonceinasupportperiodandthismakesitdifficulttoassess(from Clients receivingsupportfromSHSagenciesoftenidentifyasneedingawiderangeofservices. What arethegapsinserviceprovision? accommodation werereferredtoanotherservice. medium-term/transitional housingand14%ofclientswhoneededshort-termoremergency alternative serviceprovider.Additionally,morethanone-quarter(27%)ofclientswhoneeded long-term housing,with51%ofclientswhoneededthistypeaccommodationreferredtoan For transitoryserviceusers,themostfrequentlyreferredaccommodationwas Referral ofservices People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients All accommodation types All other SHSCpublications. Data areunweightedandbased onaselectcohortgroup;therefore,clientcountsarenotcomparable toweighteddatain Long-term housing Long-term housing transitional Medium-term/ accommodation or emergency Short-term All transitory service users service transitory All 36% 25% 13% 12% Aged 15–24 Aged 29% 16% 16% 41% 50 years and over and years 50

10% 12% 31% 21% 14% ofmales)(Figure33). whereas femalesweremorelikelytohavebetween91–365daysofsupport(20%comparedwith Males weremorelikelythanfemalestohave1dayofsupportonly(29%comparedwith24%), and almosthalf(49%)ofallsupportperiodsspanned2–60days(Figure34). More thanone-quarter(26%)ofallsupportperiodsfortransitoryserviceuserswere1dayonly, Length ofsupportperiods 3 supportperiods.Onlyasmallproportionhad4ormoreperiods(3%). 1 July2011and30June2012.Almostin7(15%)had2supportperiods20(5%) More thanthree-quarters(77%)oftransitoryserviceusershadonly1supportperiodbetween compared witharound5,700(47%)formales. support periodsduringthistime.Ofthese,femaleshadaround6,400(53%)periods, In 2011–12,therewere8,700transitoryserviceusers,andtheseclientsreceivedabout12,100 Number ofsupportperiods client lastreceivedservicesfromanagency(AIHW2017). beginning onthedayaclientfirstreceivesservicefromanagency,andending As statedearlier,asupportperiodreferstothetimeclientreceivesservicesfromanagency, How dotransitoryserviceusersengagewithservices? Source: Figure 33:Lengthofsupportperiod,transitoryserviceusers,bysex(%)

s A er l SupplementarytableS.SUPPORT.25. t vi ra F ce em ns u M se it al al or es es rs y 0 People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients 1 0 1 day 1 2 0 2–7 days 2–7 3 0 4 0 8 Per cent – 60 days 60 5 0 6 0 6 1– 90 days 90 7 0 8 0 91 – 365 days 365 9 0

1 0

5 Transitory service users 5

70 Transitory service users more than10nightsofaccommodation(Figure 35). 1 in5(16%)transitoryserviceusersreceivedup to10nightsofaccommodation,and34%received higher thantheproportionforpersistentservice users(16%)andservicecyclers(29%).Almost Of alltransitoryserviceusers,half(50%)didnotreceiveanynightsofaccommodation.Thisismuch Nights ofaccommodation and Indigenousclients(17%comparedwith14%). to receivejust1daysupport(21%comparedwith15%).Thiswasalsothecasefornon-Indigenous Older transitoryserviceusers(aged50andover)weremorelikelythanyoungerclients15–24) 91 and365daysofsupport(27%comparedwith21%)(Figure34). received between1and30daysofsupport.Femalesweremorelikelythanmalestoreceive The majorityoftransitoryserviceusers(76%)receivedupto90dayssupport,andoverhalf(53%) Days ofsupport People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Figure 34:Numberofdaysclientreceivedsupport,transitoryserviceusers(%) Source:

service users service All transitory All Females SupplementarytableS.SUPPORT.25. Males 0 1 0 2 0 1 3 d 1– ay 60 3 0 d ay s 4 0 P 6 2 er 1– –7 5 c 90 0 d en ay d t ay s s 6 0 7 9 8 0 1– –3 36 0 da 5 da ys 8 0 ys 9 0 1 0

• 22%(or1,900clients)of transitoryserviceuserswerehoused: support periodofalltransitoryserviceusers: At thestartofstudyperiod,allclientswerehomeless. Lookingattheendoflastclosed housing tenure,andtheconditionsofoccupancy. of clients.Todetermineaclient’shousingsituation, 3aspectsareconsidered:dwellingtype, At thebeginningandendofeachsupportperiod, aSHSagencyrecordsthehousingsituation for transitoryserviceusers? What isthehousingsituationat endofthelastclosedsupportperiod with theverylownumberofsupportperiodsandtotaldaysforthiscohort. and/or contactfrequencyrequirementsofthismeasure(seeAppendixBfordetails)combined then homelessagainatleastonceduring2011–12.Thisisperhapsnotsurprisinggiventhetime For transitoryserviceusers,only3%reportedtransitioningfrombeinghomeless,tohousedand Repeat episodesofhomelessness their housing situation at the end of support is accessed from a single engagement with a SHS agency. the support.Mosttransitoryclientsonlyhad1supportperiod(77%)in2011–12,soforthese The housingoutcomesofclientsarebasedontheirlastsupportperiodwhereintheagency‘closed’ What arethehousingoutcomesfortransitoryserviceusers? compared withIndigenoustransitoryserviceusers(50%44%,respectively). Non-Indigenous transitoryserviceusersweremorelikelytonotreceiveanynightsofaccommodation – 1%(or<100) wereinaninstitutional setting. – 10%(oralmost900)were livinginpublicorcommunityhousing – 11%(oralmost1,000) wereinprivateorotherhousing Source: Figure 35:Nightsofaccommodation,transitoryserviceusers(%) 1 2 3 4 5 6 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 er c

accommodation SupplementarytableS.SUPPORT.25. en t

No No People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

1–10 nights

11–30 nights

nights 31–60 31–60

61–120 nights

121–240 nights

241+nights

5 Transitory service users 5

72 Transitory service users Table 15:Housingoutcomesattheendoflastclosedsupport,transitoryserviceusers information onthehousingoutcomesoftransitoryserviceusers. the endoftheirlastclosedsupportperiod(Table15).Linkagetootherdatasetsmayprovidefurther The housingsituationforalmost1in5(18%,or1,600)transitoryserviceuserswasunknownat • 3in5(60%,or5,200)transitoryserviceusersremainedhomeless: People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients – 2%(or200)werecouchsurfingorwithnotenure. – 56%(or4,900)wereinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation – 2%(or150)hadnoshelter(roughsleeping)orinanimproviseddwelling Housing situationattheendofsupportandclientpercentage emergency accommodation Couch surfingornotenure Rough sleeper Short-term or Homeless 56% 2% 2%

Institutional settings community housing Private housing Public or Housed 11% 10% 1%

Unknown Unknown 18% ?

with otheradministrativedatasets,theoutcomes oftheseclientsmaybebetterunderstood. of SHSClongitudinaldatasetsoverlongerperiods oftimeandthepotentialtointegrateSHSC or howmanymorefoundlonger-termhousingaftersupportended.Withthefutureavailability followed further,thereforeitisnotpossibletodeterminehowlongtheseclientsremainedhomeless Beyond receivingsupportfromSHSagencies,thehousingjourneyoftheseclientscannotbe accommodation (13%). in short-termoremergencyaccommodation,theywerelesslikelythanothercohortstoreceive majority oftransitoryserviceusers(71%)neededaccommodation,whichislowerthanothercohorts 1 in5(18%)transitoryserviceuserswasunknownattheendoftheirlastsupportperiod.While the with 44%forpersistentserviceusersand36%cyclers).Thehousingoutcomeofalmost cohorts andtheyweremorelikelytoreportbeinghomelessattheendofsupport(60%compared Transitory serviceuserssoughtassistancefromSHSagenciesoverashorterperiodthanother almost two-thirds(62%)ofpersistentserviceusersand2in5(40%)cyclers. of thiscohortreportedexperiencingatleast2these3vulnerabilityconditions,comparedwith domestic orfamilyviolenceand/orproblematicdrugalcoholuse).Lessthan1in5(17%) users didnotreportexperiencinganyofthe3vulnerabilityconditions(mentalhealthissues, Of allclientsinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation,almosthalf(47%)oftransitoryservice time (Reynolds2008). the literaturethatsuggestsmostpeoplewhoexperiencehomelessnessdosoforashortperiodof the majorityoftheseclientsreceivingsupportforupto30daysin2011–12.Thisisconsistentwith in thisstudygroup.Overall,transitoryserviceusershadasmallnumberofsupportperiods,with Transitory serviceusersaccountedfor43%ofallthoseinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation What doesthistellus? • • • clients inshort-termoremergencyaccommodation. with youngertransitoryserviceusers(aged15–24)(64%compared58%),61%ofolder females inpublicorcommunityhousingand14%privateaccommodation. to behousedattheendoftheirlastclosedsupportperiod(27%comparedwith16%),13% continuing tobeinshort-termoremergencyaccommodation(62%). at theendoftheirlastclosedsupportperiod(67%comparedwith54%),mostmales Older transitoryserviceusers(aged50andover)weremorelikelytoremainhomeless,compared Comparatively, femaletransitoryserviceusersweremorelikelythanmale Male transitoryserviceusersweremorelikelythanfemaletobehomeless People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

5 Transitory service users 5

74 Transitory service users People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients * eventually, wasabletorentahouse.Adamishopinghewillbegetbackthatsoon. anything long-term.Afteraseriesofshort-termstaysinvariousplaces,hegotjoband, a SHSagencyhelpedhimwithsometemporaryaccommodation,butwasunabletooffer He hadbeeninasimilarpositionwhenhefirstmovedtothecity4yearsago.Thattime, motels whiletryingtofindanotherjob. commute everymorningandnight.Forthepast2weeks,hehasbeenlivinginhostels house wentup.Helefthisjobamonthagobecausehecouldnolongertoleratethe2-hour no longeraffordtherent,andthenhadtomoveevenfurtheroutofcitywhenrentonthat He nowhasnojobandhouse.wasforcedtomoveacheaperhousewhenhecould would haveputhimbehindadeskallday.Inhindsight,itwasthewrongdecisionforhim. Adam*, 41,lovedhisjobworkingoutdoors,whichiswhyhedidn’ttakethepromotionthat Case study3:Transitoryserviceuser of theAIHWtostereotypehomelessnessclients. present anexampleofa‘typical’short-termoremergencyaccommodationtransitoryserviceuser;itisnottheintention This casestoryisnotbasedonanactualperson.Itde-identifieddatacollatedfromtheSHSC.intendedto

• doesnotallowthemto havecontrolof,andaccesstospaceforsocial relations. • hasnotenure,oriftheir initialtenureisshortandnotextendable;or • isinadwellingthat inadequate; or alternatives theyareconsideredhomelessiftheir currentlivingarrangement: In brief,theABSdefinitionstatesthatwhenaperson doesnothavesuitableaccommodation to controllivingspace(ABS2012). represents home—whichmayincludeasenseof security,stability,privacy,safetyandtheability ‘homelessness’ not‘rooflessness’.Homelessness isalackofoneormoretheelementsthat The ABSdefinitionofhomelessnessisinformed byanunderstandingofhomelessnessas The AustralianBureauofStatistics(ABS)statistical definitionofhomelessness Mackenzie (2008). of homelessness,andtheculturaldefinitiondevelopedbyChamberlain definition developedbytheAustralianBureauofStatistics(ABS),UnitedNations be consideredhomeless.Commonlyreferredtodefinitionsofhomelessnessincludethestatistical complexities inbothdefininghomelessnessaswellthecharacteristicsofpeoplewhomight There isnooneuniversallyagreeddefinitionofhomelessness,rathertherearesignificant Defining homelessness Background totheHousingJourneysproject services wereneeded,whatprovided,and,housingoutcomesforclients. accommodation) andcoveredbasicdemographicdetails,reasonsforseekingassistance,what the keycohortsofinterest(roughsleepers,couchsurfersandclientsinshort-termoremergency Services homelessclients2011–12to2014–15 The preliminaryresultsofthisstudyareoutlinedinthewebreport Preliminary results of homelessclientsandthecharacteristicsthoseclients. and experiencesthroughouttheprocess.Alsoexaminedarehousingoutcomesofcohorts specialist homelessnessservicesbycohortsofvulnerablepeopleaswelltheircircumstances The primaryobjectiveofthecurrentprojectistocreateagreaterunderstandinguse homelessness, andtocontributetheevidencebasethatshapespolicyservicedevelopment. monitoring oftheassistanceprovidedtopeoplewhoareeitherhomelessoratrisk collected datafromhomelessnessagencies1996to2011.TheSHSCisdesignedenable the previousSupportedAccommodationAssistanceProgram(SAAP)NationalDataCollection,which required. TheSpecialistHomelessnessServicesCollection(SHSC)beganon1July2011,replacing by assessingtheirneeds,providingdirectassistanceand/orreferringclientstootherservicesas Specialist HomelessnessServices(SHS)assistpeoplewhoarehomeless,oratriskofhomelessness, Appendix A:Backgroundinformation People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients (AIHW2016).Thiswebreportprovidedasummaryof A profileofSpecialistHomelessness

Appendix A: Background information 76 Appendix A: Background information • • • following circumstances: For thepurposesofSHSC,clientsareconsidered tobehomelessiftheyarelivinginanyofthe SHSC clientsconsideredtobehomeless • • • comprises threecategoriescapturingthediversityofhomelessnessexperience: when theyliveinaccommodationthatfallsbelowacommunity’sminimumstandards.Thisdefinition Chamberlain andMackenzie(2008).Accordingtothisdefinition,peopleareconsideredhomeless The definitionofhomelessnesswidelyusedinthesectoristhatdevelopedby Mackenzie andChamberlain’sculturaldefinitionofhomelessness • • The UnitedNationsidentifieshomelesspeoplewithintwobroadcategories: The UnitedNations(UN)definitionofhomelessness homelessness counts(ABS2012). situations thatmirrorhomelessnessforavarietyofreasons,thesepeoplearenotincludedin defined ashomeless.Whilehomelessnessisnotachoice,somepeoplemaychoosetolivein It isimportanttonotethatpeoplewholackoneormoreoftheseelementsarenotnecessarily People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients boarding/rooming house, emergencyaccommodationortransitionalhousing. accommodation, hotel,motel, bedandbreakfast;ortenuretypeisrenting orlivingrent–freein conditions ofoccupancy arelivingwithrelativesrent-free,couchsurfing. tenure typeisrentingorlivingrent–freeinacaravan park. in theopen,amotorvehicle,improvisedbuilding/dwelling, caravan,cabin,boatortent, security oftenure. for example,singleroomsinprivateboardinghouseswithouttheirownbathroom,kitchenor ‘couch surfing’whichiswhensomeone‘crashes’atthehomeofafriendorrelative. another. Forexample,movingbetweenemergencyaccommodationandrefuges.Thisincludes sleeping roughorinimproviseddwellingssuchasacar. a shelterorlivingquarters;and Short-term oremergency accommodation—dwellingtypeisboarding/rooming house,emergency House, townhouseorflat(couchsurfingliving withnotenure)—tenuretypeistenure,or No shelterorimproviseddwelling—includingwhere thedwellingtypeisnodwelling,street,park, Tertiary homelessness—whenpeopleliveinaccommodationthatfallsbelowminimumstandard; Secondary homelessness—whenpeopleareforcedtomovefromonetemporaryshelter Primary homelessness—whenpeopledon’thaveconventionalaccommodation.Forexample, Secondary homelessnesswhichmayincludepersons: Primary homelessness(or‘rooflessness’)whichincludespersonslivingonthestreetsorwithout – – – (UNSD 2017). homeless; and (including dwellings,sheltersorotherlivingquarters); persons livinginprivatedwellingsbutreporting‘nousualaddress’ontheircensusform persons usuallyresidentinlong-term‘transitional’sheltersorsimilararrangementsforthe with nousualplaceofresidencewhomovefrequentlybetweenvarioustypesaccommodation

they cansecure andaffordhousing (Ravenhill2003). to mainstreamsocietyare morelikelytoexithomelessnessandstayhoused inthelong-termif Homeless individuals who hadn’t engaged in the ‘homeless culture’ and had maintained a connection • • therearehigherratesofolderpeoplebeinghomeless, duetotheirlowratesofexit • menaremorelikelytoenterhomelessness,and lesslikelytoexit findings indicatedthat: groups whereexitinghomelessnesswaslesslikely thanforotherdemographicgroups.Thekey of homelessness(Johnsonetal.2015).Inregards toexitsoutofhomelessness,therewereseveral used modellingtodeterminetheimpactofdifferent factorsonanindividuals’entryintoorexitout relationships betweenstructuralfactors,individualcharacteristicsandhomelessness.Onestudy for beinghomeless’.FurtherresearchusingtheJourney’sHomelongitudinaldatasetexamined cared. Additionalcatalystscouldbe‘doingitfortheirchildren’and‘notwantingtostigmatised cope withtheroughsleepinglifestyle,hadasuddenshockortrauma,realisedthatsomeone (Ravenhill 2003).Thesecanincludethatpeople:felttheyhadreachedrockbottom,couldnolonger to promptlong-termhomeless(specificallyroughsleepers)intowantingexithomelessness Just asthereare‘triggers’forenteringhomelessness,alsoeventswhichcanactcatalysts by theirpersonalcircumstances—sex,age,labourforceparticipationandeducation. 7 to9monthperiod.Themodellingalsofoundthatthedurationpeoplearehomelessisinfluenced the 4to6monthperiod,thendeclineovertime,whileexitsoutofliteralhomelessnesspeakat The modellingconcludedthatexitratesoutofculturalhomelessnessinitiallyincrease,peaking at • • were usedformodelling: length oftimetheyhadbeenhomeless(Codd-Clarketal.2014).Twodefinitionshomelessness modelling techniquestotestwhetherpeople’sexitsfromhomelessnesswereinfluencedbythe The MelbourneInstitute(usingtheJourneysHomelongitudinaldataset)employedstatistical Exiting homelessness • • statistical definitionmaynotoccur: outlined above.However,itisimportanttonotetwokeyareaswherealignmentwiththeABS These categoriesalignascloselypossiblewiththeABSstatisticaldefinitionofhomelessness boarding houses,hotelsandmotels) of homelessnessdependingonhowtheyreporttheircurrenthousingsituation. to specialisthomelessnessagenciesforassistancetheyaredefinedashomelessorbeingatrisk being built)areexcludedfromABShomelessnesscounts.Ifpeopleinthesecircumstancespresent halls ofresidence,peoplewhoaretravelling,ormaybelivinginashedwhiletheirhouseis identified (AIHW2018). no specificquestiononcrowdingisincludedintheSHSC,thisgroupcannotbeseparately if theydo,arealso less likelytoexithomelessness(Johnsonetal.2015). people whoaremarriedorinadefactorelationship arelesslikelytobecomehomeless,but Literal homelessness(sleepingrough,squattingoremergencyaccommodation). Cultural homelessness(includingpeoplecouchsurfingandlivingincaravans,cabins,hostels, Those whochosetoliveinsituationsthatmirrorhomelessness(forexample,studentsliving The ABSstatisticaldefinitionincludespeoplelivinginseverelycrowdeddwellingsandas People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

Appendix A: Background information 78 Appendix A: Background information As suchtheyaretreated asadults). services unaccompanied whilesleepingrough,withoutanestablishedsupport systeminplace. presenting alonetoSHS forassistance(theseclientshavebeenincluded astheypresentedto All statisticsarebasedon uniqueadultclients(aged18andabove) young people(aged15–17) homeless oratriskofhomelessness. of homelessnessthatpresentedtoservicesforassistance. Itdoesnotrepresentallofthosewhoare It isimportanttonotethattheSHSConlyincludes dataonthosehomelessclientsoratrisk 1 July2011tothe30June2015(aperiodof4years). conducted bytheAIHW.Dataspansperiodfrom thecommencementofcollectionon The sourceofdataforthisanalysisistheSpecialist HomelessnessServicesCollection(SHSC) Data SHSC data. this studyarenotcomparabletothepublishedresultsofweighteddatainotherreportsusing Data usedinthisanalysisareunweightedandclientcountslikelytobeunderestimated.from of thoseinshort-termoremergencyaccommodationallwhoareexperiencinghomelessness. Data presentedinthisreportislimitedtoclientspresentingSHSforassistanceanddoesnotcoverall conditions andlivesofpeoplewhoarehomeless,atriskhomelessness. housing andotherservicescanhelpachievemultiplediverseobjectives,suchasimproving the Supportive housingmodelssuchasHousingFirstcanhelpexaminehowthelinkagebetween organisations todeliverongoingsupportservicestenants(Parselletal.2015). suggested thepotentialforinsufficientconnectionsbetweenhousing,healthandcommunity are notwithouttheirchallenges.Inadditiontoshortagesinhousingsupply,someresearchhas However, aswithmanyhousingmodels,implementationofHousingFirstprogramsinAustralia homelessness forahouseholdwhomaybecameatriskduetotemporarycrisis. allows ittobetailoredhelpanyone.Assuch,aHousingFirstapproachcanappliedprevent with anydegreeofserviceneeds.TheflexibleandresponsivenatureaHousingFirstapproach A HousingFirstapproachhasthepotentialtobenefitbothhomelessfamiliesandindividuals currently programsoperatinginSydney,MelbourneandBrisbane(AHURI2018). European countries,Canada,andmorerecentlyinNewZealandpartsofAustralia–thereare housing (AHURI2018).BeginningintheUSA1990s,modelhasbeentakenupbyseveral people experiencinghomelessness,andisanalternativetoprovidingshort-termoremergency Housing Firstisahomelessassistanceapproachthatprioritisesprovidingpermanenthousingto Housing First or locationandpreventingreoccurrenceofhomelessnessisthencompromised(Johnson2006). permanent housingisavailable,sometimesitnotsuitablefortheindividual,duetoitsquality sometimes, whenthetransitionalaccommodationrunsout,returntobeinghomeless.Evenif end uplivingintransitionalandemergencyaccommodationforlongperiodsoftime, Due tothelackofaffordablehousingandlongwaitinglistsforpublichousing,peopleoften into theroledifferenttypesofhousinghaveinpreventingreoccurrencehomelessness. Housing availabilityandaffordabilityaretwostructuralfactorstoexitinghomelessnessties People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

and outcomes. seeking assistance),serviceprovision(identified needs,lengthofsupportandservicesnotprovided) personal circumstances(includinghousingcircumstance, livingarrangementsandreasonsfor Housing JourneysaimstoimprovetheknowledgeofSHSCclientsintermsdemographics, • • • • thereasonsclientsinthesecohortsseekassistance • The focusoftheoverallanalysisisondevelopinganunderstandingof: Aims oftheHousingJourneysproject • • • These cohortswerefurtherdividedinto3sub–groupstoidentifyclientsofinterest: • • • Each reportwillfocusononeofthesepopulations: and 30June2012. restricted tothoseclientswhofirstpresentedSHSagenciesforassistancebetween1July2011 3 primarypopulationsofhomelessclients.Forthepurposesthesereports,analysiswas This reportisthethirdinathree-partseriesofreports,whichexamineHousingJourneys Scope oftheHousingJourneysproject 30 June2012,anddidnotreceivesupportinanyfollowingfinancialyear. and atleastoneothersupportperiodbetween1July201230June2015 1 July2011and30June2015 in 2011–12. accommodation, numberofsupportperiods) the housingoutcomesforclientsinthesecohortsatendoftheirsupport. the intensityofsupport(forexample,dayssupport,spanperiods,nights the servicesprovidedtoclients(aswellasnotprovided—forexample,unmetneeds) characteristics ofpersistentserviceusers,transitoryandcyclers Transitory serviceusers:clientswhohadatleastonesupportperiodbetween1July2011and Service cyclers:clientswhohadatleastonesupportperiodbetween1July2011and30June2012 Persistent serviceusers:clientswhohadatleastonesupportperiodineachfinancialyearbetween those whowerein‘short-termoremergencyaccommodation’onpresentationtoaSHSagency those whoidentifiedas‘couchsurfing’onpresentationtoaSHSagencyin2011–12 those whoidentifiedas‘roughsleepers’onpresentationtoaSHSagencyin2011–12 People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

Appendix A: Background information 80 Appendix B: Technical information scope ofthisreport. have continuedtoreceiveSHSsupportbeyond30 June2015butthisinformationisnotwithinthe receiving supportatthebeginningofreporting periodforthisstudy.Similarly,someclientsmay length ofsupportandaccommodationmaybe underestimated forclientswhowerealready Data onaccommodationorsupportprovidedbefore 1July2011arenotavailable;thereforethe (aged 15–17)presentingalonetoSHSagenciesfor assistance. All datainthisreportarebasedonuniqueadult clients(aged18andabove)youngpeople 2011–12 to2014–15 Table B1: Short-term oremergencyaccommodationcohortsbypatternsofserviceuse possible patternsofserviceusebycohortacrossthestudyperiod. over thesubsequent3financialyears(to30June2015).TableB1providesanoverviewof short-term oremergencyaccommodationwereselectedbasedontheirlevelofserviceengagement after 1July2012arenotincludedinthestudygroupforthisreport.Threecohortsofclients between 1July2011and30June2012.Therefore,clientswhoappearedintheSHSCforfirsttime short-term oremergencyaccommodationonfirstpresentationtoaspecialisthomelessnessagency The aimofthisstudyistoexaminethecharacteristicsandexperiencesclientswhowerein becomes a‘client’oncetheyreceiveservicesfromtheagency. at riskofhomelessness,ratheritcapturesthosewhoseekassistancefromaSHSagency.Aperson homelessness. Thecollectiondoesnotincludeallpeopleexperiencinghomelessnessandthose data fromSHSagenciesfundedbystateandterritorygovernmentstorespondorprevent The SpecialistHomelessnessServicesCollection(SHSC)wasestablishedon1July2011andcollects Scope andcoverage Appendix B:Technicalinformation People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients Transitory service users service Transitory cyclers Service users service Persistent accommodation cohort emergency or Short-term 2011–12 Financial year support from specialist homelessness services services homelessness specialist from support year Financial         2012–13         was received was 2013–14         2014–15        

years forwhich specialisthomelessness serviceswereaccessed. comparisons betweenthe cohortswithinthestudygroupastheydiffer basedonthenumberof items. Datacompleteness hasimprovedeachyearandthisisimportant toconsiderwhenmaking In 2011–12,therateofinvalid/‘don’t know’/missingresponseswashigh for anumberofdata month wheretheywere expectedtoparticipate. 96%ofagenciesreturneddataforeach This responseratehasincreasedovertimein2014–15, returned supportperioddatain2011–12,although manydidnotreturndataforall12months. of the2011–12SHSCdataidentifiedsome quality issues.Inparticular,90%ofSHSagencies The clientsinthisstudyfirstappearedtheSHSC between1July2011and30June2012.Analysis Key dataqualityissues,2011–12 • • • • Metadata OnlineRegistry(METeOR)foreachreportingyear. Further informationcanbefoundintheSHSCdataqualitystatementsavailableonAIHW incomplete data,thereforeallSHSCdatausedforthisanalysisareunweighted. among thestudygroup.Animputationstrategyhasnotbeenappliedtocorrectformissingor information ismissing,andhowthosepeoplewhosewasnotcollectedaredistributed services. Howmuchthisaffectstherepresentativenessofdatadependsonhow This meansdatamaynotbecompletelyrepresentativeofpeoplereceivingspecialisthomelessness Not allin–scopeagenciessubmitdata,andnotinformationsoughtfromSHSclientsisanswered. Incomplete data was not reported for 7% of the short-term or emergency accommodation population from this study. Indigenous statusisonlyprovidedwithexplicitconsenttoreportthisinformation. Under-identification canvaryacrosstimeandbetweenjurisdictions.IntheSHSC,informationon • informationaboutaperson’sIndigenousstatusisrecordedinaccurately. • peopleareaskedbutinaninconsistentway • peoplearenotaskedabouttheirIndigenousstatus people. Thismayhappenwhen: affected byanumberofissues,themostcommonbeingunderidentificationIndigenous as beingofAboriginaland/orTorresStraitIslanderorigin.DataaboutIndigenousAustraliansare A clientisconsideredIndigenousif,atanytimebetween1July2011and30June2015,theyidentified Data qualityandIndigenousAustralians . available inAppendixBofthe2011–12nationaldatareport available inAppendixAofthe2012–13nationaldatareport 2011–12 SpecialistHomelessnessServicesCollectionDataQualityStatement 2012–13 SpecialistHomelessnessServicesCollectionDataQualityStatement 2013–14 SpecialistHomelessnessServicesCollectionDataQualityStatement 2014–15 SpecialistHomelessnessServicesCollectionDataQualityStatement People in short-termor emergencyaccommodation: a profileofSpecialist Homelessness Servicesclients

Appendix B: Technical information Acknowledgments

This report was prepared by the staff of the Housing and Homelessness Reporting and Development Unit of the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.

We are grateful to the Department of Social Services and the state and territory departments responsible for the delivery of specialist homelessness services for funding the Specialist Homelessness Services Collection and for working with us to conduct the collection.

We are especially appreciative of all homelessness agencies and their clients for their participation in the data collection, making research of this nature possible.

82 People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients Abbreviations

ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics

AIHW Australian Institute of Health and Welfare

SHS Specialist Homelessness Services

SHSC Specialist Homelessness Services Collection

People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients 83 References

ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) 2012. Information paper—a statistical definition of homelessness. ABS cat. no. 4922.0. Canberra: ABS.

ABS 2018. Census of Population and Housing: estimating homelessness, 2016. ABS cat. no. 2049.0. Canberra: ABS.

AHURI (Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute) 2018. What is the housing first model and how does it help those experiencing homelessness? Melbourne: Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute Limited. Viewed 18 August 2018. .

AIHW (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare) 2016. A profile of Specialist Homelessness Services homeless clients 2011–12 to 2014–15. Canberra: AIHW. Viewed 10 August 2018, .

AIHW 2017. Specialist Homelessness Services Collection manual. Cat. no. HOU 268. Canberra: AIHW.

AIHW 2018. Couch surfers: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients. Cat. no. HOU 298. Canberra: AIHW.

Bevitt A, Chigavarzira A, Herault N, Johnson G, Moschion J, Scutella R. 2015. Complete findings from Waves 1 to 6. Journeys Home research report no. 6. Melbourne: Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research.

Chamberlain C & Mackenzie D 2008. Counting the homeless 2006. ABS cat. no. 2050.0. Canberra: ABS.

Chamberlain C & Johnson G 2011. Pathways into adult homelessness. Journal of Sociology 49: 1. doi.org/10.1177/1440783311422458.

Cobb-Clark D, Herault N, Scutella R & Tseng Y. 2014. A journey home: what drives how long people are homeless? IZA Discussion Papers no. 8495.

Council on Federal Financial Relations 2018. National Housing and Homelessness Agreement. Canberra: The Treasury.

Fitzpatrick S, Bramley G & Johnsen S 2013. Pathways into multiple exclusion homelessness in seven UK cities. Urban Studies 50: 1.

Johnson G 2006. On the Move: a longitudinal study of pathways in and out of homelessness. Melbourne: RMIT University.

Johnson G, Scutella R, Tseng Y & Wood G 2015. Entries and exits from homelessness: a dynamic analysis of the relationship between structural conditions and individual characteristics. AHURI final report no. 248. Melbourne: Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute.

Parsell C, Moutou O, Lucio E & Parkinson S 2015. Supportive housing to address homelessness. AHURI final report no. 240. Melbourne: Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute Limited. Viewed 28 July 2018. .

84 People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients Pilinger J 2007. Homeless pathways: developing effective strategies to address pathways into, through and out of homelessness. Dublin: Focus Ireland.

Ravenhill M 2003. The culture of homelessness: an ethnographic study. London: London School of Economics. PhD Thesis.

Reynolds F 2008. To examine programs that assist vulnerable and complex chronically homeless people. Churchill Fellowship Report. February 2008.

UNSD (United Nations Statistical Division) 2017. Number of homeless persons per 100,000 population indicator. Viewed 18 March 2018. .

Wood G, Batterham D, Cigdem M & Mallet S 2015. The structural drivers of homelessness in Australia 2001–11. AHURI final report no. 238. Melbourne: Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute.

People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients 85 List of tables

Table 1: Profile of people in short-term or emergency accommodation and other SHS clients (%)...... 3

Table 2: Summary of short-term or emergency accommodation cohort demographics, (%)...... 12

Table 3: Summary of short-term or emergency accommodation cohort vulnerabilities, (%)...... 14

Table 4: Drug and alcohol counselling and mental health services provided by SHS to those clients who needed that service, persistent service users, by sex (%)...... 26

Table 5: Accommodation services not provided or referred to clients who identified a need, persistent service users, by sex (%)...... 27

Table 6: Mental health services not provided or referred, persistent service users, by sex (%)...... 28

Table 7: Repeat episodes of homelessness, persistent service users (%)...... 33

Table 8: Housing outcomes at the end of the last closed support period, persistent service users...... 34

Table 9: Drug and alcohol counselling and mental health services provided by SHS, service cyclers, by sex (%)...... 47

Table 10: Accommodation services not provided or referred to clients who identified a need, service cyclers, by sex (%)...... 49

Table 11: Mental health services not provided or referred, service cyclers, by sex (%)...... 49

Table 12: Repeat episodes of homelessness, service cyclers (%)...... 54

Table 13: Housing outcomes at the end of the last known support period, service cyclers...... 55

Table 14: Accommodation services not provided or referred by clients who identified a need, transitory service users, by age (%)...... 68

Table 15: Housing outcomes at the end of last closed support, transitory service users...... 72

Table B1: Short-term or emergency accommodation cohorts by patterns of service use 2011–12 to 2014–15...... 80

86 People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients List of figures

Figure 1: Overview of short-term or emergency accommodation clients and defined service use cohorts, 2011–12...... 6

Figure 2: Vulnerabilities, all short-term or emergency accommodation clients (%)...... 10

Figure 3: Vulnerabilities, persistent service users (%)...... 18

Figure 4: Accommodation issues key reason for seeking assistance, persistent service users (%)...... 19

Figure 5: Financial issues as a reason for seeking assistance, persistent service users (%)...... 20

Figure 6: Interpersonal relationships as a reason for seeking assistance, persistent service users (%)...... 21

Figure 7: Health/medical issues as a reason for seeking assistance, persistent service users (%)...... 22

Figure 8: Needs—other specialist services, persistent service users (%)...... 24

Figure 9: Accommodation service provision, persistent service users (%)...... 25

Figure 10: Number of support periods, persistent service users (%)...... 29

Figure 11: Length of support period, persistent service users, by sex (%)...... 30

Figure 12: Number of days client received support, persistent service users (%)...... 31

Figure 13: Proportion of time spent in support, persistent service users (%)...... 31

Figure 14: Nights of accommodation, persistent service users (%)...... 32

Figure 15: Vulnerabilities, service cyclers (%)...... 39

Figure 16: Accommodation issues key reason for seeking assistance, service cyclers (%)...... 40

Figure 17: Financial issues as a reason for seeking assistance, service cyclers (%)...... 41

Figure 18: Interpersonal relationships as a reason for seeking assistance, service cyclers (%)...... 42

Figure 19: Health/medical issues as a reason for seeking assistance, service cyclers (%)...... 43

Figure 20: Needs—other specialist services, service cyclers (%)...... 45

Figure 21: Accommodation service provision, service cyclers (%)...... 46

Figure 22: Number of support periods, service cyclers (%)...... 50

Figure 23: Length of support period, service cyclers (%)...... 51

Figure 24: Number of days client received support, service cyclers (%)...... 52

Figure 25: Proportion of time spent in support, service cyclers (%)...... 52

Figure 26: Nights of accommodation, service cyclers (%)...... 53

Figure 27: Vulnerabilities, transitory service users (%)...... 60

People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients 87 Figure 28: Accommodation issues key reason for seeking assistance, transitory service users (%)...... 61

Figure 29: Financial issues as a reason for seeking assistance, transitory service users (%)...... 62

Figure 30: Interpersonal relationships as a reason for seeking assistance, transitory service users (%)...... 63

Figure 31: Health/medical issues as a reason for seeking assistance, transitory service users (%)...... 64

Figure 32: Accommodation service provision, transitory service users (%)...... 66

Figure 33: Length of support period, transitory service users, by sex (%)...... 69

Figure 34: Number of days client received support, transitory service users (%)...... 70

Figure 35: Nights of accommodation, transitory service users (%)...... 71

88 People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients Related publications

This report, People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients, is the third in a 3–part series of the Housing Journeys Project. The editions published subsequently can be downloaded for free from the AIHW website.

Supplementary tables relating to this report were published separately online as People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients— Supplementary tables.

The following AIHW publications relating to homelessness might also be of interest:

• AIHW 2018. Couch Surfers: a profile of Specialist homelessness services clients. Cat. no. HOU 298. Canberra: AIHW. .

• AIHW 2018. Sleeping rough: a profile of Specialist homelessness services clients. Cat. no. HOU 297. Canberra: AIHW. .

• AIHW 2018. Specialist homelessness services annual report 2017–18. Canberra: AIHW. .

• AIHW 2016. A profile of Specialist Homelessness Services homeless clients 2011–12 to 2014–15. Canberra: AIHW. .

• AIHW 2016. Exploring drug treatment and homelessness in Australia: 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2014. Cat. no. CSI 23. Canberra: AIHW.

• AIHW 2016. Domestic and family violence and homelessness 2011–12 to 2013–14. Canberra: AIHW. .

People in short-term or emergency accommodation: a profile of Specialist Homelessness Services clients 89 Short-term or emergency accommodation is a service provided for the homeless, and those at risk of homelessness. This report explores the circumstances, experiences and housing outcomes of clients in short-term or emergency accommodation who sought assistance from specialist homelessness services between 1 July 2011 and 30 June 2015. Based on service use patterns across a 4-year period, this comprehensive analysis highlights the diversity and the complexities of the short-term or emergency accommodation population.

aihw.gov.au

Stronger evidence, better decisions, improved health and welfare