CIH response to the HCLG Committee’s inquiry on children in temporary accommodation

The use of unsuitable accommodation like B&Bs is a result of the broader housing crisis and a lack of available, affordable homes. Local authorities frequently have no choice but to place families in TA due to an inadequate supply of social housing and rising private rent. An overwhelming number of TA placements are in environments unsuitable for families, such as B&Bs, where facilities and privacy are lacking. For instance, many B&Bs offer only single rooms without proper cooking facilities, laundry facilities or private bathrooms, forcing families to share limited space for prolonged periods. This can lead to overcrowded living conditions where children sleep on floors, or share beds with parents or siblings. Such conditions disrupt sleep patterns, further impacting mental health, school performance and physical development​. This lack of facilities also places a high financial burden on households, as takeaways are often the only alternative to home-cooked meals, and expensive laundrettes the only way to clean clothes. Households placed out of area face increased transport bills and journey times to get children to school, further impacting their quality of life and childhood. Research has found that these households tend to accrue debt - as such, homelessness ‘relief’ often entrenches financial precarity.

For some families, this ‘temporary’ accommodation stretches on for years, with some children spending most of their formative years in TA. In London between 2022 and 2024 the number of families staying in hotels beyond the six-week maximum increased more than threefold. The long-term consequences of such placements can be devastating, with children growing up without ever experiencing the stability of a permanent home​. Additionally, these ‘temporary stays’ are characterised by instability as many households are moved between different types of accommodation, however there is currently no public metric on how many moves each household has experienced. This continual movement has a significant detrimental effect on parents trying to provide stable and safe environments, and to children who are unable to settle and recover following the often traumatic event of becoming homeless.

In addition to the concerns related specifically the use of hotels and B&Bs, we believe it is important that this committee also turn its attention to the conversion of non-residential buildings to homes through permitted development rights (PDR) and/or material change of use processes. A recent assessment states that there have been 220,060 homes created through material change of use since 2015/16, many of which involve the conversion of disused office blocks to flats. Relevant building regulations do not fully apply to these homes, and the track record for their quality is therefore often poor, especially in terms of ventilation, excess cold and excess heat, damp and mould and space standards. We set out these issues in detail in our response to the previous government’s Future Homes Standard technical consultation. Some of these units are placed within industrial estates with heavy traffic, without access to outdoor space, and away from communities and transport links. For children, this can impact their ability to play safely, attend education and maintain good health.

A government commissioned study in 2020 concluded that “permitted development conversions do seem to create worse quality residential environments than planning permission conversions in relation to a number of factors widely linked to the health, wellbeing and quality of life of future occupiers”. In our Homes at the Heart strategy, we recommend that caution be exercised in the continued deregulation of conversions using PDR to ensure that developments cannot circumvent the planning system in order to create low-quality, unsafe homes.

Currently, there is no mechanism to ensure that temporary accommodation is of a certain quality, or requirement that the accommodation is inspected prior to a household being placed in it, or assessed for suitability during their stay. This means that these standards rely on the individual culture, political climate and capital funds of each local authority, which leads to inconsistency. The risks include housing children in damp, cold, overcrowded, vermin infested accommodation, and we know that poor quality provision of TA can lead to tragic results, with fifty-five infant deaths in TA recorded since 2019. At CIH, we have campaigned for the Decent Homes Standard to apply to residential temporary accommodation, which would improve standards of living for homeless households. Additionally, under Awaab’s Law, a social landlord will be expected to offer TA to a household where a property with a hazard that poses a significant risk to a resident’s health is found, and the property cannot be made safe within the specified timescales, understanding that it would be contradictory if that TA was not required to be free of the same hazards.

No. Local authority spending on homelessness has more than doubled since 2010-11.  Around three quarters of all local authority spending on homelessness is on TA and councils frequently cite the financial burden of it as a substantial risk to their solvency. Additionally, The Centre for Homelessness Impact’s Value for Money report into TA, proposed that, due to a lack of comprehensive data on TA across local authorities and national benefits, it is likely the overall spend is much higher than the £2.29 billion reported. It should also be noted that this is just the initial cost to local and central government. The societal cost should not be underestimated.

For hotels in particular, FOI requests to English councils submitted by a councillor for Dagenham revealed millions of pounds being spent on hotels. For many budget hoteliers, TA is a lucrative part of their business model. Between April 2023 and March 2024 in Westminster alone, over £28 million was spent on hotels. The CIH’s UK Housing Review Autumn Briefing published a study by Soha Housing outlining how a programme of grant aid offered to local authorities to acquire properties could garner significant savings in hotel costs. This study was developed in reference to asylum accommodation, but its findings could be extrapolated to local authorities to tackle the high costs of nightly TA such as hotels and B&Bs. Work by CIH with the Centre for Homelessness Impact showed a modest increase in output of social rented housing of 10,000 homes annually could largely be financed by direct savings in TA costs and in housing benefit/universal credit that would otherwise be paid for higher-cost private rented properties.

It is important to note here that the homelessness crisis is driven not only by the historical under supply of homes but also inadequate social security, paired with the rising cost of living. The latest homelessness statistics noted that the number of households owed a duty, due to the end of an assured shorthold tenancy linked to inadequate income from changes in their benefits entitlement, increased by 91.7 per cent. Whilst this represents a small proportion of households it is a trend worth examining further. A household is far more expensive to support once they are homeless, compared with subsidising their income. Whilst there is still a drastic shortfall in available social homes, welfare reform will be necessary to make savings on immediate TA spend, and prevent more homelessness presentations due to insubstantial benefits.  

 These reforms should include:  

• Aligning local housing allowance (LHA) rates and those of current market rents. LHA rates have been frozen at the 2011 rates. Our recent budget submission included analysis that showed that LHA would need to be restored to the lowest 30 per cent of housing at least, to relieve pressure on council finances.     
• Removing the benefit cap and the two-child benefit cap would lift a barrier to households living in TA, particularly for those with children who are prevented from moving on to secure accommodation. Removing these caps would enable households to sustain tenancies and avoid stays in TA in the first place.

End no recourse to public funds (NRPF), which is a policy that exacerbates child poverty and leaves people at a high-risk of homelessness contributing. Due to being barred from welfare support, children whose parents are subject to NRPF living in TA can be particularly susceptible to the worst experiences of it.

At the policy level, TA standards should be reassessed to guarantee basic safety and habitability, particularly in family accommodation. Local authorities should prioritise family placements in settings that provide essential facilities for cooking, bathing, laundry, Wi-Fi and sleeping without overcrowding. These spaces would also benefit children’s wellbeing by allowing for family-friendly policies and trauma-informed environments.

Collaboration between local authorities and community organisations could also help address children’s social and play needs. Designating safe play areas within TA facilities or partnering with local community centres to provide access to secure play spaces can give children in TA crucial opportunities to engage in normal childhood activities. Furthermore, policies limiting access to common spaces or restricting visitors could be revised, so children living in TA can benefit from peer interaction and social development opportunities​.  

Implementing national safeguarding guidelines for local providers and accommodation providers would be welcomed by those working with homeless households. For families with children, this could include limiting the use of mixed-use accommodation where families are housed alongside single homeless individuals without children. This would mitigate risk of abuse, or unnecessary exposure to harmful behaviour. 

Where out of area placement cannot be avoided, collaboration between local authorities would help support families. The Shared Health Foundation’s pilot Families Experiencing Homelessness Notification System in Manchester provides a promising approach by alerting local health and education providers when a child enters TA, enabling a coordinated response to safeguard their wellbeing and educational progress. This initiative underscores the need for better cross-agency collaboration, ensuring that children do not fall through the cracks and receive the support they need during such a disruptive time.   

Support

To adequately deal with the trauma of experiencing homelessness, parents and children would benefit from tailored support to navigate the practical implications and emotional impacts of their stay in TA. Currently, over half (55.4 per cent) of those presenting to local authorities as homeless are known to have one or more support needs, such as a history of mental health issues and/or a physical or learning disability, with evidence that this number is rising. Additionally, stays in TA in themselves have been shown to worsen physical and mental health problems. This means that there is a significant cohort of homeless households whose needs are compounding, which will likely impact their future outcomes and further need for public services.

Further, domestic abuse is the second most prevalent reason that a household will present as homeless; this has increased 7.8 per cent since the previous quarterly reporting. This means that many of the children who are owed a homelessness duty are known to have fled abusive households. It is imperative that stays in TA do not contribute to existing trauma and instead offer environments where families can start to rebuild their lives after abuse.

To address these issues, concerted efforts from government, local authorities, and accommodation providers are crucial. CIH advocates for an urgent increase in social housing availability, as permanent social housing would eliminate the reliance on TA for many families in need.

We are also members of the End Child Poverty Coalition, who recently published eight tests to assess the government’s upcoming Child Poverty Strategy. The eighth test states that high quality public services, including social housing, must play their full part in combatting poverty, as ultimately, resolving the root causes of poverty is crucial to lessen the need for, and impact of TA. Investment in social housing would ensure that TA fulfils its intended role as a short-term solution, rather than prolonging an endless cycle of instability for families.

By increasing social housing, enforcing quality standards in TA, and supporting children’s needs through better policies and community engagement, the government, local authorities, and housing providers can alleviate some of the negative impacts of TA on children and ensure they have a stable foundation for growth and success. We welcome the new government’s commitment to address this crisis, noting the recent announcement of ringfenced funds to the homelessness prevention grant. As the Spending Review approaches, we urge the government to address the critical needs of the 151,630 homeless children currently in temporary accommodation. We would welcome the opportunity to further contribute to these discussions.

Visit parliament's website for more information on the inquiry.

For more information on our response please contact Stephanie Morphew, policy and practice officer, stephanie.morphew@cih.org.