Rea Life Reform Report 2 December 2013
2 I have had to cut back where I can. I have no money. I sod ots of things from my home to pay off debts. I hate debt and worked a my ife but I reay don t have anything ese of vaue to se to make ends meet, so I am iving on nothing reay RLR Participant We re reforming the wefare system to hep more peope to move into and progress in work, whie supporting the most vunerabe. DWP Poicy Statement 1 1 https://www.gov.uk/government/poicies/simpifying-the-wefare-system-and-making-sure-work-pays
3 Rea Life Reform is tracking the impact of wefare reform on up to 100 househods across the North through to 2015. This is the second of six schedued reports on how the househods are responding to wefare reform and whether the reforms are achieving their ambition of getting peope into work and to reduce pubic spending. This foows on from our first report pubished in September 2013. We have been abe to identify some eary emerging trends as we as give a summary of resuts from the second round of interviews, which a took pace in October 2013. Headines Househods spending ess than 20 per week on food has increased from a quarter to a third The number of peope having no money eft each week once bis have been paid is 51% - increased from 39% in Juy [round1] The average spend on food per person per day is 2.10 - down from 3.27 Househods are spending 16% more on gas and eectricity Househods having to make debt repayments of more than 40 per week have doubed The average eve of debt per househod is 2,273 33% of respondents now have counci tax debt 83% of househods think wefare reform changes wi adversey impact on their heath and webeing 86% think wefare reform wi adversey affect shops and businesses in their neighbourhood up from 68% Increasing criticism of support received to hep peope access empoyment
4 Contents: 5 Preface 6 A Faciitator s Experience 7 Rea Life Reform: a brief recap 8 Rea Life Reform: feedback on report one 9 1. Rea Life Reform & Everyday Life how famiies are making decisions on finances, spending on food and fue. Future spending pans and current debt eves. 14 2. Heath & Webeing what issues, if any, are arising that impact on heath and webeing? 16 3. Famiies & Neighbourhoods how are famiy and support networks managing? What impact, if any wi there be on neighbourhood faciities? 20 4. Work Opportunities how are the househods engaging with seeking work opportunities and how do you find support systems? 23 5. Coping & Concerns tracking how optimistic peope fee about the future and what their primary worries are. 25 6. Who are our Rea Life Reform househods? how they are affected by wefare changes, their economic circumstances, famiy composition and heath status. 26 7. Concusions 27 8. What Next? 28 Appendix 1 - Other Reated Research Recenty Produced I am abe to pay the oans, but ony because my mum pays one of them for me out of her pension. We, if my son came home and said that he wanted to go to coege, university or do a course that cost money, we just coudn t do it.
5 Preface Wecome to Rea Life Reform Report two. The response to our first report in September was exceptiona. We are gratefu to everyone who read the report, supported the study, took part in socia media discussions and raised awareness of the findings and the importance of carrying out this research. This study is about the impact of wefare reform on househods across the north and participants in round two righty asked us what had happened as a resut of their participation in round one. Our response has been that it has heped inform the actions, not ony of our respective organisations but of many others who have read the report and used the study to hep them formuate poicies and make decisions. We aso beieve that the report has infuenced debates, discussions and hopefuy decisions at a macro eve. At the very east, it has given the tenants of socia housing the chance to be heard on this most important of issues and we thank them for their time and honesty. Since the September report, we have been busy raising awareness of the impact of wefare reforms on rea peope and communities and the need to capture these experiences. We have been speaking at conferences; meeting with agencies outside of the housing sector; and ensuring the initia findings have been shared with as many peope and organisations as possibe. In particuar, with support from others, we have been raising awareness with MPs and poicy shapers and were invited to present to the A Party Pariamentary Group (APPG) for Housing in the North in November. The response to and support for the report has confirmed to us that this ambitious study is something of rea vaue. We woud ike to pay a specia thanks to our foowers on Twitter who have reay heped generate such interest. @ReaLifeReform has enabed us to take the rea stories of rea peope to a goba audience. We aso recognise that our faciitators are committed and professiona coeagues who make this study possibe by istening to and recording the experience and findings of our participants. One of the faciitators, Penny, shares her view and her experiences during the first six months of the study. Ceary the report is about peope affected by wefare reform. However, we think that you wi find it interesting to hear the views of one of our faciitators as their experiences repicate those of many front ine staff. Eighty-seven tenants participated in the second round of interviews in September, which is up from seventy-six. Twenty-five of the participants that took part in round one eft the study eaving fifty-one that have participated in both rounds. We have, however, recruited a further thirty-six new participants. Where possibe, we have tried to repace the househods who have eft the study with simiar househods. Through the report we have highighted differences, where appicabe, between those who have participated in the first and second round of the project and those new joiners who have joined in round two. We are advised that this is an acceptabe process. Once again, we hope you wi find the report usefu to you, your organisation and to those who make decisions. Andy Wiiams, LHT
6 A Faciitator s Experience I shoud preface this by saying that I m not a frontine housing officer. My roe as a communications manager means that I m one step removed from the reaity of daiy ife in socia housing. One of the reasons I wanted to get invoved in the Rea Life Reform project was to get a cearer picture of how peope are being affected by the reforms that I spend a great dea of time teing them about. My other reasons were entirey persona when my famiy ost everything in the 1980s, socia housing and the benefits system enabed us to start rebuiding our ives. Personay and professionay, this is a subject I care deepy about. The peope I ve taked to during this project don t match the stereotype of socia housing tenants on benefits. They don t drink or smoke; they work in skied but ow paid roes; run thriving vountary groups; have chidren who are in the top streams at schoo, studying at the best universities or working to provide for their own chidren. They are dignified and private peope who want to shied their oved ones from their probems and make meaningfu contributions to their famiies and communities. However, they are desperatey worried about how they wi pay their most basic bis as they sink deeper into debt; they are concerned about how their famiies are being affected; they are now having to make the choice between heating and eating; and most teing, they have given up hope of being happy. And because the peope I ve met aso suffer from serious i heath or disabiity, none of them can see a way out of their current situation they physicay cannot do any more than they are aready doing and fee tremendousy guity for not being abe to do so. Years in academia have taught me how to carry out interviews and remain impartia, but I have been profoundy moved by the stories I have heard, especiay during the second round of interviews when worries about the most basic human needs of eating and staying warm have dominated. I have aso fet competey poweress at times. But that s why I work in socia housing because through the huge variety of work that we do whether it s direct engagement with individuas and communities or behind the scenes service deveopment and projects ike this one our sector strives to make a positive difference to peope s ives. Penny Aison, Kirkees Neighbourhood Housing
7 Rea Life Reform: a brief recap A system that was originay designed to support the poorest in society is now trapping them in the very condition it was supposed to aeviate. Iain Duncan Smith, May 2010 The Wefare Reform Act 2013 introduced a series of radica changes to the UK wefare system. The government is seeking to ensure that work pays and to bring about savings to pubic spending. Rea Life Reform is tracking the impact of wefare reform across a cohort of 70-100 representative socia housing househods across the north. They share their experience of wefare reforms, incuding how they are responding to the wefare to work campaign and how the changes are impacting on them and their househod, incuding financia circumstances, spending decisions, heath and webeing, and impact on famiy, as we as the wider neighbourhood and work opportunities. Using a series of semi-structured interviews, the research captures information and the impact of the changes on them. In tota, six study visits wi be competed over 18 months. The interviews are coated, anaysed and pubished in a quartery report detaiing trends and experiences. The research study sets out in its origina remit to: Share and compare househod experiences Demonstrate where wefare reform is achieving its goas Highight any unintended consequences of the changes on peope and communities Be used to raise awareness Be used to hep infuence the strategic direction of organisations and provide an evidence base for these decision-making processes Be used to support and deveop front ine staff that manage and respond to the issues associated with wefare reform Expore peopes experience of accessing empoyment This is the second report from Rea Life Reform. The study visits took pace in October 2013, six months after the introduction of the spare room subsidy or bedroom tax, after counci tax benefit changes and other wefare reforms. The third report is due in March 2014 and a fu study brief and research methodoogy is avaiabe on request. Quotations contained in this report are reproduced verbatim.
8 Rea Life Reform: feedback on report one Rea Life Reform can pay a roe and evidence that pubic judgements are formed more by stories/experiences than stats /evidence Ipsos Mori it accuratey tes what is being experienced by tenants and gives socia housing tenants a voice Michee Reid CEO of TPAS essentia reading Juia Unwin CEO of the Joseph Roundtree Foundation I now fee that I am not aone, I coud te you some stories of my very own battes to try and survive in this ife This is rea. The findings refect what we are seeing and experiencing every day. It s important that this is shared and peope start to isten and take notice TPAS Conference participants The Archbishop of York referenced Rea Life Reform in artices for the Yorkshire Post, highighting that it shows the [negative] impact of the changes to the wefare system on socia housing tenants He went on to reference comments made by study participants about how difficut it is to afford to feed their famiy.
9 1. Rea Life Reform & Everyday Life In Round 2 we asked the same questions about Everyday Life as we did in Round 1 to hep us track peopes spending habits, choices being made, and to fuy appreciate the impact of wefare reforms. In order to better understand the experience and journey in some areas, we asked more detaied questions. For exampe, we now ask questions around what constitutes the weeky househod spend, separate to food, and choices being made on fue and heating costs. This section ceary indicates that in the 3 months since the first report, the reaity of everyday ife has got tougher. Househods are sti showing resiience and trying to cope but have ess money to spend; have ess money if any eft each week; are spending ess on food and are not spending what is needed to heat their homes. Debts continue to be a rea worry and there has been a significant increase in peope panning to borrow more money. This is a in October and before the winter months, where expenditure is expected to be higher. We asked participants to te us what their priority payments are each week and the top 5 responses were: Priority Payment Percentage (%) 1. Fue 85% 2. Food 35% 3. Other Bis 24% 4. Rent 24% 5. Counci Tax 14% Fue stands out as a high priority payment. This refects the increased demand for fue and heating in October and refects concerns over their future spend. For those participants who had competed both studies, it showed that twice as many peope viewed Fue as a priority payment in round 2 compared to round one. There was a sight drop in peope saying rent was a priority payment, athough this was on a par with other bis. The comments we received ceary show that peope are grapping with a number of priority payments and bis and making tough choices. Counci tax was one of the biggest changes with 14% of househods now viewing this as a priority debt compared to ony 1.4% in round one. This refects the number of peope who have faen into counci tax arrears and comments received about oca authority action to recover the debt suggests that some househods are having to adjust to the changes introduced in Apri 2013. I didn t have any debt prior to this so this is stressing me out. I thought I was going over the edge a coupe of weeks ago and went to see my doctor.
10 Money Left Each Week In the space of 3 months, it s become very cear that our participating househods are increasingy strugging financiay. One in three participants te us that the money they have eft after bis has reduced since Juy and 73% say that their benefit or income changes have affected the type of thing they spend their money on. The average amount of money participating househods have eft each week after paying bis and food is now 4.79 compared to 12.50 in Juy. This 7.71 weeky reduction can easiy be seen in the increased average spend on fue ( 4.07 extra per week) and increase in debt repayments ( 3.61 extra per week). The reduction in money eft each week is despite reduced spending on food. 4.79 Average amount of money eft each week per househod after paying bis and food 73% say that the wefare reforms have affected the type of thing they spend their money on I aready can t afford to feed mysef propery so wi just be worse. I get upset, angry, depressed. I m being much more carefu in the supermarket about what I buy. I buy more and more own brands as they are cheaper I no onger buy meat for meas because it s too expensive. Food Spending In Round 1 peope expressed concern about coping on reduced budgets and how this woud impact on their food spending. Round two shows some significant changes. The average spend per househod is now 32.94 per week. As the participant househods vary in size, average spend is aso cacuated on food spend per person per day. This has reduced by 36%, with the average spend now being 2.10 per person per day. This equates to 1.17 per person per day ess being spent on food since Juy. We don t have breakfast and dinner now. We have one mea a day. We ve been doing that for about two months and we ve got used to it.
11 Neary three quarters of a househods (72%) are spending ess than 40 a week on food. At the beginning of this study it was 63%. The number of participants spending ess than 20 per week on food has increased from a quarter to a third. Based on the Engish House Survey that shows the average weeky income for socia housing customers in the North of Engand as 265 per week, this indicates that the participants are spending ony 12% of their income on food. In round 2, we introduced a new question to better understand the amount spent on weeky shopping. On average, participating househods spend 40.20 per week on shopping of which 32.94 is on food. This eft an average of ony 7.26 per week per househod being spent on other househod and persona items incuding toietries, ceaning materias, nappies, washing powder & other such items. 32.94 average weeky amount spent on food 22% reduction since Juy 2013 2.10 average daiy amount spent on food per person 72% The study aso shows that there are changes in shopping habits with more participants giving exampes of buying ower quaity food that is cheaper. It was cear that many househods are eating ess fresh fruit and vegetabes and meat or fish. In addition to changing their shopping habits and spending ess per week on food, the study aso shows there has been an increase in peope shopping in supermarkets, with 69% now using supermarkets compared to 51% in Juy. The report aso suggests that there has been a reduction in peope using oca shops or a combination incuding oca shops. Ony 13% of househods say they are using oca shops, a 57% reduction from round 1. This appears to be driven by the high costs of food ocay, athough for some the cost of transport to the supermarket prevents them from attending. This wi be expored more in round 3 but whatever the reason, it is aready impacting on oca neighbourhoods. spent ess than 40 per week on food this was 63% in report 1 I suffer from diabetes and sometimes I am not abe to buy enough food. A few months ago I went into a hypo because I had not eaten enough. I went unconscious... there are no positives
12 Fue Spending The average weeky spend on fue, incuding gas & eectricity, has increased by 16% and in October was averaging 30.07 per participating househod. This means since Juy, participating househods have on average have to find 4 per week more to pay for their increased fue consumption. 16% Increase in fue costs The average spend on fue per day has increased by 11% and is now 2.18 per person per day. And this is ony October. We expect the average fue consumption to go up in Round 3, being competed in January. However, with an average of ony 4.79 eft per week after bis, how househods wi cover this anticipated increase in spending is a concern. Eary trends in round two are indicating that whist peope may want or prefer to increase their usage, they cannot afford to. Many participating househods are aready making tough choices not to heat their homes or use fue to cook food. 24% of participants said they had actuay reduced their spending on fue since Juy. 48% had seen no change and ony 28% said they had increased their spend at a time when we expected spend to increase. 30.07 per week equates to an average annua househod bi of 1563. The study was expecting bis to increase during round 2 and round 3 to an annua average exceeding 2600 or 50 per week. The increase in one quarter has ony been 4 per week. Affordabiity has worsened and, as the resuts show, participants are unikey to find the required 20 per week extra to maintain average heating consumption, given that this is four times more than the average money eft at the end of each week. Househod debt 73.6% of participants are now in debt, averaging 2273 per househod. This shows a sight reduction from round one where 81% said they were in debt. Despite average weeky debt payments of 21.82, 53% of househods report that their eves of debt have remained the same and the average debt has reduced by ony 15 per househod over a period of 13 weeks, despite an average of 280 expected to be paid since the ast report. This potentiay iustrates higher borrowing costs and aso indicates a perpetua cyce of borrowing which is refected in participants comments on how they are coping or managing their finances. There has been an increase in the number of peope owing money on counci tax, with one in three househods having a counci tax debt. In report one, ess than 2% identified counci tax as a priority debt and this has now risen to 14%. In addition, 27% of participants are in debt with househod bis; amost 17% are in debt to the bank, and 10.1% to their credit card company. 2.18 Per person per day is spent on fue I won t be abe to afford to put the heating on and this wi affect my chidren s heath as they have asthma. 1 in 3 Have a counci tax debt 43% Have debts up to 1,000
13 89% are worried about debt this was 83% in report 1 Our findings show that participants are increasingy worried about debt but are preparing to borrow more money. In answer to the question are you worried about getting into more debt? the responses indicated that the figure has risen to 89% from 83% in report one. This correates to the response to the question are you panning to borrow more money?. Last time 63% said they weren t intending to borrow more money but in this round it had faen to 55%. This suggests that peope are thinking again about how they can afford to maintain their househod costs. 55% don t pan to borrow money this was 63% in report 1 12.2% of participants owe money to a pay day ender or oan shark and they shared their experiences of managing debt, hightighting how they choose who to pay and when. There is aso evidence of resiience within communities. 16% of participants confirmed they owe money to reatives and friends. Anecdota evidence and exampes show that peope are coping through support from friends and famiy, incuding meas being provided and oan repayments being made by oved-ones, often parents, in receipt of pension benefits. 12.2% owe money to a pay day ender
14 Leves of debt Whist the average debt per househod is 2,273 - a margina reduction from round one when it was 2,418-43% of participants now have debts up to 1,000, which is a 23% increase since the first report. There has been an increase from a fifth to a quarter of househods owing up to 500. This is refected in experiences where peope are borrowing sma sums to suppement their weeky outgoings. Observations It is cear from round 2 that peope are reay strugging to make ends meet. Spend on food has reduced with cheaper quaity or processed food being bought, but there are more and more exampes of peope making decisions not to eat or being reiant on others to cope. There are some strong exampes of resiience with neighbours supporting one another. Fue costs have increased but not at the expected average eve and of concern is the number of househods reducing their fue costs at a time when they need to increase them. We wi expore this in more detai in round three and in 2014 track whether recent announcements on energy bis makes any difference to the participating househods. Peope are aready making some tough choices and others have no choice. This is aready reveaing a strain on heath and webeing and increasing concerns of getting into more debt. The safety net is margina in many cases and there is worry about how househods wi cope over the next few months. This is being cosey monitored. 2. Heath & Webeing It was apparent from Report 1 that peope were not ony concerned about future impact of wefare reform on their heath and webeing, but they aso gave exampes and accounts of how this was actuay starting to happen. Some peope eft the study between round 1 and round 2. Anecdotay, the majority of tenants who eft the study did so because they were finding their situation too stressfu and were worried about their heath or of that of someone in their famiy. We are now capturing information on why peope are eaving the study but our hope is to retain membership wherever possibe. One participant said in this round of visits: I m sick of taking about it and I ve submitted my diary sheets to my housing officer whist I ve been writing down my feeings it s actuay been making me fee more depressed. In response to being asked whether the benefit changes wi affect the heath of peope in my house 83% of a participants fee that wefare reform changes are having a negative impact on their heath and we-being, which is marginay down from 88% in report one. 83% agree changes wi affect the heath of peope in their house 88% in report 1 NOTE: At date of isue (Dec 2013) The average debt per househod was reported as 2,418 for Report One. This version (Juy 2014) shows an adjusted figure of 2,288
15 In round one, we reported that it woud be usefu to share the research and its resuts with GPs, Hospitas, Heath & Webeing Boards etc so that they can anticipate and start to respond to any issues that might emerge, as we as use the information to hep inform debates and reforms. This has and continues to happen. The ongitudina eement of this study, aong with rea exampes where there has been a proven impact on heath and webeing, wi further strengthen this reationship and evidence base for them to use when panning services. On a positive note, the number of peope from the origina cohort who fee wefare reform wi not have any negative impact on their heath and we-being rose from 6.8% to 11 % In this section, we received an enormous amount of quaitative data and comments. It is apparent from the overa intensity of the anguage used by participants that there has been an increase in terms of concern and worry about what wefare reform might mean for them and their famiy. Words that featured heaviy during this part of the interviews incuded heath, depressed, food, worry, stress, stressed and worried. Peope are genuiney worried about their situation and the impact it is having on them, their menta heath and that of their househod. Observations Concern about heath and webeing continues to be a strong theme emerging from the research. What is cear is that many of the participants are identifying that wefare reform is not just impacting upon them but having a broader impact on their famiies, support networks, neighbours and the neighbourhood. The rippe effects of ower incomes are starting to surface and we suspect that this wi manifest itsef in more demand and pressures on the heath sector as the eves of stress rise; dietary issues emerge as peope cut back on food, and concern at reducing spend on heating during the winter months which coud resut in heath reated inesses. Report one suggested a strong correation between eves of income and heath and we-being. This second report confirms that position and re-iterates the need not ony for housing and heath to work together but for poicy makers to more deepy understand the reationship between the two sectors. The faciitators expressed genuine concern about the extent and frequency of comments made about menta heath deteriorating.
16 3. Famiies & Neighbourhoods One of the report s objectives was to give an indication of how participants fee the changes are impacting positivey or negativey on their famiies, neighbourhoods and oca shops. Report 2 suggests that the participants are now starting to see the impact of wefare reform, with many of the participants strongy agreeing to the questions in this section. Their stories refect what they are experiencing to support this increasing concern. Impact on Famiies Whist respondents reported concerns about their own heath and webeing, many aso raised concerns about the impact on their chidren and wider famiy networks. In answer to the question, wi the benefit changes affect your chidren s education? we were tod: 61% agree changes wi affect chidren s education 54% in report 1 61% fear that benefit changes wi affect their chidren s education, compared with 54% in round one. As reported in round one, the percentages are not as high as for participants own heath and we-being but that is in part a refection of the apparent determination and resiience not to et the changes impact negativey on their chidren.
17 They aren t starving but my daughter needs a new schoo jumper, winter coat and shoes. I can t afford to buy a fina year schoo photo and fee devastated. She doesn t have any games consoes, and can t afford to go on schoo trips and outings. Some of my daughter s friends are we off. I am worried that she can t buy nice presents for birthdays or buy cothes for my daughter to wear to parties or even get her to the parties. I am worried about the impact this is having on my daughter, though she never compains, but it does make you fee reay crap. Impact on Neighbourhoods As we highighted in the first report, the potentia impact of benefit changes runs much wider, with 76% of participants highighting concerns about the impact on their neighbourhoods both in terms of its appearance and antisocia behaviour. Peope were aso worried about the strength of their support networks. When asked the same question wi the benefit changes impact on my neighbourhood? participants reported that their eve of concern had risen to 88% from 76%. 88% Agree that changes wi impact on their neighbourhoods 76% in report 1 It shoud be noted that 9 out of 10 first time participants in the study expressed rea concern for their neighbourhood, whie the eve of concern expressed by retained participants rose from 76% to 85%. In the first report, we highighted the concern that crime and anti-socia behaviour wi increase and the comments back from participants this time ceary indicate that this concern continues to rise. If peope are strugging ike we are then, yes, I see more crime. There have been five robberies in this area in the ast week. The poice have been to my house to warn me about it. The more that peope get into debt, the ess they spend on their homes. I reckon it coud become a run down area.
18 Loca Shops When asked the question whether the benefit changes wi affect my oca shops and businesses we saw the foowing response: 86% are concerned that wefare reform wi have a negative impact on their neighbourhoods 68% in report 1 It reveaed one of the biggest changes in resuts from the two rounds of interviews, with 86% expressing concern about oca shops, compared to 68% in round one. Further anaysis shows that for participants who took part in both round 1 and round 2, the change is even more marked, rising from 68% to 93%, which suggests that peope are recognising that there is more pressure on them and their oca economy. This is supported by quotes and comments from the participants. The more peope are getting into debt the ess they spend in their oca shops. I can see peope being aid off from oca shops. One of them around the corner cosed down a whie back. Peope are buying ess. They have ess money and there are more food banks heping peope. That wi affect sma businesses as peope are not spending money or going shopping.
19 Support Networks A simiar picture starts to emerge with peope s support networks. In response to being asked whether My support network wi be affected by wefare changes the percentage of peope stating it wi have a negative impact rose from 56% to 66%, an increase of 10%. 66% Agree that their support network wi be affected 56% in report 1 For new participants to the survey, this concern was highest at 71% and for retained study participants it was at 62%. As in the first report, it is the comments from the participants that show that peope are attempting to be resiient and creative about how they support and hep one another, but the underying tone is one of having ess and feeing under stress to make ends meet or to keep your heads above water. My neighbour is in the same situation as me and has no money. I have neighbours who wi cook extra and bring a mea round for me; they sometimes drop a bag of shopping off at the front door. A group of us mums share the cost of a Sunday roast, and we take it in turns to cook in each other s houses each week. It spits the cost and we know the kids are getting some decent food. Observations This report shows that famiies continue to share the burden arising from wefare reform using some resiient and creative approaches, such as the sharing of the Sunday roast, however is that a ong asting soution? Severa participants have identified in this round of visits an increasing recognition of and concern about oca shops and associated economic activity. Loca shops are often the ife bood of a neighbourhood and their success is essentia to the oca economy. This wi be something to monitor during the course of this study. Participants are aso identifying an increasing concern with crime and the fear of crime. The narrative from participants suggested that this was on the increase athough this study recognises that we have not cross referenced with oca poice statistics, but we wi share the findings with Poice Commissioners where possibe.
20 4. Work Opportunities One of the principa drivers behind wefare reform was to support more peope into work, or into better paid work. As Lord Freud said in Juy 2013, he wanted to create a wefare system that was fit for 21st century: One (wefare system) that has incentives for peope to get into work and increase their hours that is fair to the peope who use it, and fair for the taxpayer who pays for it. Lord Freud, Juy 2013 Rea Life Reform tracks how participants are responding to incentives to get into work and increase their hours. The research aso expores participants views as to how effective agencies such as Job Centre Pus are and identifies any barriers to empoyment. In this second round of interviews we have incuded further questions on empoyment, incuding, for exampe, detais on the number of jobs appied for. As some of these eements were not incuded in the first round, we cannot give a retrospective anaysis of trends but these wi be incuded moving forward. Looking for work We see a higher percentage of Rea Life Reform participants searching for work in the October study than our baseine in the summer. The reasons for this are not known but we are aso aware that there was a decrease in the percentage of peope who are working, reduced from 28% to 23%, as a resut of new joiners to the survey and some churn in participant numbers. Interestingy, we have seen a significant increase in those peope who are in part time work (which accounts for the majority of in-work participants) who are now seeking to increase their hours. Given one of the intentions behind wefare reform was to encourage peope into work, it may be that such an increase in peope aready in work ooking to increase their hours is a positive response to the poicy. In future versions of the research we wi track how successfu participants have been in increasing their hours. Aternativey, peope might be ooking to increase their hours of work as a way to avoid the poverty trap.
21 40 Average number of appications per person ooking for work since Juy Athough we have seen an increase in the percentage of participants ooking for work, this has not yet transated into significant eves of success in gaining new (or more) empoyment. However, the evidence from the research suggests that participants are active in their work searches and in Round 3 we wi ook to expore evidence regarding the impact of sanctions. 50% of participants ooking for work have appied for at east one job in the past year, the vast majority of whom have appied in the ast 6 months. The work programme just isn t working, it just ticks boxes and pretends that it is soving a probem. Bring back the future jobs fund, it gave rea opportunities to peope. I m happy to dea with the benefits agency but specific peope don t give a monkey s and make me fee ike a scrounger. There is no sympathy there at a. It is aso cear from the responses that participants are appying for mutipe jobs, even with this eve of activity and commitment from househods, with 24% of active job search participants appying for 40 or more jobs in the past three months, 70% of appicants are not making it to interview stage.
22 Athough they have been good in signposting me to grants that are avaiabe to hep me with my business, I hate going to the job centre I find that the security guards are quite intimidating; they are quite scary when they come up to you in twos There is no dignity in it at a. I hate having to broadcast my detais in front of everybody. Stressed out, depressed, frustrated and angry, banging my head against a brick wa. They don t isten or answer any of my questions. They ose paperwork or don t send paperwork, and they have an attitude and are judgementa. Participants in the study were asked if they coud do with more support in getting into work. 37% advised they woud wecome additiona support an increase from the baseine survey which reported 26%. It may be that as participants are increasingy ooking for and faiing to get work, that they have identified the need for additiona support. This support coud come from a wide range of agencies incuding Job Centre Pus, their andords, vountary and third sector organisations pus wider community and famiy networks. However, there appears to be strong criticism of the support provided by the Job Centre and wider benefit support staff, echoing comments made in the first round. Some common themes from respondents incude a sense that the system is infexibe, that they as caimants are stigmatised for being there, and a sense of dread and despair when engaging with benefits/job Centre Pus. Observations In this round of interviews, we have coected more data on empoyment issues, incuding detais on how frequenty participants are appying for work and how many jobs they have appied for since the summer. This data suggests that many participants are very active in their job searches but this is not easiy transating into either new empoyment or increased hours. Those peope who are ooking to increase their hours are reporting concern that this wi actuay eave them worse off due to the benefit changes. Whist the advent of Universa Credit is aimed at reducing this disincentive, participants remain in imbo and are aso reporting concerns about the wider ro out of Universa Credit. Of significant concern is the apparenty poor reationship between benefit support staff and job centre advice staff and job seekers. We wi be meeting with DWP regiona officias to identify how housing providers and job centre systems can better support often vunerabe customers.
23 5. Coping and Concerns Rea Life Reform attempts to track how our participants are feeing about their ives and how abe they fee to manage the situations they face. Each quarter we ask a series of questions incuding how optimistic peope fee, whether they can manage any probems they re experiencing; whether they are feeing supported. 5% are optimistic about the future 11% in report 1 In our baseine study in the summer, participants were more optimistic than they are now. 40% of participants tod us in the summer that they fet optimistic none of the time and this has now increased significanty to 55%. At the other end of the spectrum, in the summer 11% of participants fet they were optimistic about the future. This has now reduced to just 5%. Esewhere in the research we consider how participants consider themseves to be stressed or depressed, often severey so. It is therefore perhaps unsurprising, abeit very concerning, that optimism scores so owy in this round. We have not seen increases in peope feeing unabe to dea with probems. However over a quarter of our househods are sti reporting that they fee they are never abe to dea with probems we. 36% are strugging to dea with probems 45% in report 1
24 The study aso tracks how peope fee on a scae of 1-10 (with 1 being no concerns and 10 being most concerned) to assess eves of concerns. This second report shows that scores for two of the six areas (Impact of wefare changes on you and on your neighbourhood) have the same or higher scores than in the first report. The other areas have a decreased which suggests a sight improvement in how peope are feeing since the first round of interviews. Observations Participants abiity to dea with probems, to think ceary and their eve of optimism for the future may we be infuenced by the eve of support they fee they are receiving. It is this category that shows the most positive resuts when comparing rounds one and two of Rea Life Reform. In our first study, 25% of participants fet they were supported none of the time; this has now faen to 20%. Simiary we have seen an increase in those reporting they are supported, up from 7% to 12%.
25 6. Who are our Rea Life Reform househods? In our first report we compared the househods participating in the research with the nationa and northern profies for socia housing customers. Broady our participants refected these pictures and continue to do so. Some of our participants have had to eave the research between round 1 and round 2. Athough we have managed to recruit newcomers, this has sighty changed the profie of our participants. In particuar we have seen an increase in peope with a disabiity, which we fee is beneficia for the purposes of this study as it provides us with an opportunity to expore how changes in disabiity-reated wefare support systems are impacting on the day-to-day ives of our participants. The data on bedroom size and househod composition demonstrates an imbaance in terms of the changes to under occupation in the socia housing sector. This study is not focussed on the spare room subsidy/bedroom tax as Rea Life Reform expores a facets of the wefare reforms. Number of bedrooms in the property Househod Composition Ethnicity of interviewee Percentage (%) of participants White 89.2% Back/ African/ Caribbean/Back British 7.14% Mixed/Mutipe Ethnic Groups 1% Asian 2.3% 23% of the Rea Life Reform househods incude someone who is empoyed and in work. This has dropped sighty since round one [28%] mainy due to new participants joining the study. 77% of participants are out of work and in tota 41% of participants are ooking for work. This incudes some peope aready in work and ooking to increase their hours. Of the 23% empoyed househods, 77% are in part time work and ony 23% are in fu time empoyment; the compete reverse of the nationa trend. Of those in part time work, 60% are activey trying to increase their hours.
26 7. Concusions This second report has provided invauabe information to hep understand the emerging impact of wefare reform not ony on individua househods but on their neighbourhoods and support networks as we. On a wider eve it highights issues surrounding education, empoyment and heath, and the impact that wefare reform on those services. It is evident that wefare reform is a major issue for socia housing customers and in particuar peope are raising concerns about eves of debt; financia management and heath and webeing, with some aready not coping. The research aso reveas how peope are increasingy concerned about their oca economy and their heath and we-being. This report raises serious concerns and questions around whether peope can cope on such ow income eves and whether their resiience is cose to saturation. Even at this stage, it is cear from statistics and persona stories that the consequences of wefare reform are being fet. It is important to note that this study is representative of socia housing tenants in the north. Participants who are active in the job market appear to be strugging to access work or overcome barriers (perceived or rea) to empoyment and a sma number are ooking at setting up their own businesses Many participants have no safety net how wi they manage with an unexpected crisis or change? Participants are worried as we move into winter about how they wi cope Participants are very pessimistic about the future in terms of impact on heath, neighbourhood and support networks Famiies and support networks are striving to protect chidren but are worried about chidren missing out Economicay, this report suggests that oca shops and businesses are reay strugging to remain operationa Participants experience of Job Centre support has not been positive and some participants fee demonised Participants tak of transport costs being a barrier to empoyment and other services Participants are indicating high eves off stress, depression and feeings of isoation
27 8. What Next? The third round of interviews wi take pace in January and the next report wi be pubished in March 2014. It wi provide an opportunity to track how our participants are managing and what if anything has changed for them over the winter period. We expect the third round to enabe us to see how resiient the househods and their support networks have been over the winter. Each future quartery report wi not ony provide a detaied picture of how our participants are coping [or not] but aso a more detaied anaysis of trends in terms of the subsections of research (everyday ife, heath and webeing, community impact, work opportunities). Wi peope be more positive about work opportunities? Wi the eary days of benefit changes have setted down? Wi more peope secure empoyment and/or increase their hours? Have the high eves of concern about stress and webeing changed? Rea Life Reform wi be ooking at the data emerging from these first two rounds of engagement and expore in more detai concerns around debts, fue costs, food spend, and about their neighbourhood. The resuts in addition to being used to inform nationa debates and discussions, wi aso be used to inform discussions ocay with partners incuding poice, Heath and Webeing Boards, education services and job centres. We wi be working with TPAS to produce a summary for circuation to as many tenants as possibe. We wi aso be providing a briefing note for Boards and Executives to support the dissemination of the findings and hep infuence interna debates as we move into a new year. We wi aso continue to raise awareness with MPs and other poicy makers to make them aware of the study and to inform their decisions. It is important to understand how poicies impact on rea ives. And finay, we wi continue to work with and support the efforts of many other research bodies, third party and vountary organisations, to share knowedge and experiences and to work together to raise awareness of the impacts of wefare reform on rea peope, their ives and their communities. Pease use the reports and data as you wish. Thank you for your continued support. For more information on progress with the study - foow us on twitter @ReaLifeReform.
28 Appendix 1 Other Reated Research Recenty Produced We are aware that there is other equay important research taking pace and beow is a sampe of materia that might be of interest to a Rea Life Reform foower. Monitoring Poverty and Socia Excusion 2013 Joseph Rountree Foundation and New Poicy Institute Link here Quids In socia housing research project ooking at financia capacity training Link here Testing DWP s Assessment of the Impact of the Socia Rented Sector Link here Rea London Lives Link here Overa impact of wefare reform on seected housing associations in the South West, commissioned by group of three SW HAs, carried out by Anne Power at London Schoo of Economics, due to report 2014 Investigation into the sensitivity of bedroom tax impact assessments to different assumptions, carried out by Riverside, Affinity Sutton, Gentoo, and Wigan and Leigh. Fu report avaiabe on CHP website Link here Overa impact of wefare reform on housing associations, commissioned by NHF, carried out by Anna Carke at Cambridge University, Nationa survey with regiona break down incuding Northern areas; 15 case studies (anonymised). Due for fina report 2014 Overa impact of wefare reform on arge housing associations in London, commission by G15, carried out by Juie Rugg at University of York. Quantitative emphasis, due to make interim reports in 2013 and 2014 with fina report in 2015 Facing the Future - The Future Roe and Financing of Socia Housing : Under-occupation and the Housing Benefit Reforms: Four oca case studies - Summary Link here Intended and unintended consequences? A case study survey of housing associations and wefare reforms Link here Impact of wefare reform on housing associations 2012 Baseine report Link here Direct Payments Demonstration Projects: Findings from a baseine survey of tenants in five project areas in Engand and Waes (RR822). 2012. Department for Work & Pensions. (by Sheffied Haam University)
29 Study Group Members Lisa Pickard Chief Executive Leeds and Yorkshire Housing Association Charotte Harrison Executive Director Northern Housing Consortium Richard Bramwe Assistant Communications & PR Manager Symphony Housing Group Andy Wiiams Director of Neighbourhood Services Liverpoo Housing Trust Karen Croucher Research Feow University of York Caroe Richardson Assistant Director of Housing North Star Housing Group Phi Rhodes Socia Incusion Officer Stockport Homes Vicky Bannister Director of Housing Management Wigan & Leigh Housing Stephen Bunde Director of Housing & Customer Service Leeds Federated Housing Association Ltd Noe Sharpe Executive Director Customer Services Haton Housing Trust Derek Stewart Director of Neighbourhood Services Leeds and Yorkshire HA Anna Lambert Communications Manager Haton Housing Trust Matthew Gaunt Team Manager KNH Satty Rai Poicy Services Manager Northern Housing Consortium LHT