The ‘Back From The Streets’ Project An alternative housing led approach in Hungary

1. The ‘Back From The Streets’ ProjectAn alternative housing led approach in Hungary Andrea Szabó Public Foundation for the Homeless Hungary

2. Program context • From 2010 strong political pressure to reduce rough sleeping (mainly at visible places, city centres, public areas) • New local and national law on the use of public places, new approach of (visible) homelessness by the police and local authorities • Strong need of service providers for recourses to finance reasonable and professional social work tools • New programs to help rough sleepers into appropriate accommodation

3. Program context: Activities of the Public FoundationfortheHomeless NGO role State -Agency role

4. Development of the homeless-service system in Hungary

5. Program background • Late 2010: • Remaining found from a closed program financed by the Ministry of Human Recources, coordinated by the Public Foundation • First consultations with the ministry to use the resource for the new issue (visible rough sleeping) • Early 2011: • Designing the call, developing the terms and conditions • Promoting the new program for the service providers (theapplicants) • From March to November 2011 • Dealing with administrative issues • Dealing with reduced found • December 2011 call for proposals • April 2012 final grant agreements • March – May 2012 start of supported programs • December 2012 – January 2013 closure of supported programs

6. Program details • The found • Source: National budget, Ministry of Human Resources • Amount: 104 million HUF ≈371,428 € • Supported programs • 18 programs: 7 in Budapest, 10 Cities in countryside • Target group • Pimarytargetgroup:209 chronic rough sleepers (109 living in cities in countryside, 100 living in Budapest) • Secondarytargetgroup:61 homeless people living in shelters (19 living in Cities in countryside, 42 living in Budapest)

7. Program details: locations Cityies incountryside: Szombathely, Mosonmagyaróvár, Veszprém, Székesfehérvár, Tatabánya, Kecskemét, Szolnok, Kazincbarcika, Debrecen, Nyíregyháza Budapest

8. Participants pathways

9. Why is the evaluation necessary?

10. X X Originalfigurefrom Dr. Volker Busch-Geertsema regular self- contained dwelling with rent contract regular self- contained dwelling with rent contract regular dwelling with (time-limited) occupation agree-ment based on special conditions Temporary shelter (service fee, strict rules, better living conditions) ‚Elsőként Lakhatás’ – in Hungary One-night Shelter (more rules, limited tolerance of alcohol, free service) shared housing, “training dwell-ings”, etc. flexible individual support in housing reception stage Easy access services (crisis shelters, few order, free service, tolerance of alcohol etc.) Street work homelessness Long term rough sleeping

11. An example: evaluation of aprevious housing led program • Program aim: promoting social inclusion and mainstream employment of homeless people • Found: co-financed by the EU and the state • Target group: homeless people using any service • Data collection: specific software designed for the programs • The database: 6 Region; 16 City; 23 supported program; 1062 homeless individual; 596 supported participants; 447 successfully completed individual support plan

12. Two indicators of programs at the end of the follow up period

13. How can these indicators be interpreted?

14. How can these indicators be interpreted?

15. How can these indicators be interpreted?

16. How can these indicators be interpreted?

17. Evaluation of programs 3rd of February survey • Independent annual survey since 1999 • Designed and coordinated by a working group • Target group: homeless people in contact with service providers (street work, shelters, temporary accommodations) • Location: 1999-2005 Budapest, 2006-2011 larger cities of Hungary also, 2012 smaller towns of Hungary also • Number of respondents 6,000-8,500 at each last 6 survey, 32,000 individual between 03.02.2006 and 03.02.2012. • The service providers can join to the data collection • The data collection is on the 3rd of February each year • The social workers are offering the questionnaire for the homeless people, and they also help to understand the questions or write down the answers • The questionnaire is anonym and voluntary

18. Evaluation of programs 3rd of February survey - Data structure • Constant questions every year, and annual focus themes each year – some of them repeatedly asked in a longer period • Each individual has an identical number generated each time at the same method from the monograms and birth date • The long term follow up of each individual respondent is possible including the place of the data collection (eg. on streets, in shelter etc.)

19. Evaluation of programs • The 3rd of February provides baseline data of each years on the structure and locality of the target group • Each individual in the supported ‚Back from the streets’ programs will be searched in the database, and all answered questions can be analysed as an individual history of homelessness • Also matching indicator data will be collected on ‚Back from the streets’ participants and compared to the baseline data

20. Evaluation of programs • Qualitative data collection • Regular meetings with service providers focusing on useful good practises and barriers when access to the private rental or social rental housing is sought for their homeless clients • On site interview both with social workers project leaders, and participants (part of the program-monitoring) • Detailed interview at two selected programs on the impact of the programs

21. Hajléktalanokért Közalapítvány Public Foundation For The Homeless Andrea Szabó szabo.andrea@hajlektalanokert.hu http://www.hajlekot.hu/ +36-20-989-38-61 Contact