This report and research summary “Navigating homelessness: Housing challenges faced by survivors of modern slavery” is based on a research project conducted by Dr Júlia Tomás from The Passage. This project was funded by the Modern Slavery and Human Rights Policy and Evidence Centre (PEC), at the University of Oxford, which in turn is funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC).
The Modern Slavery and Human Rights PEC have actively supported the production of the research summary and the full report. However, the views expressed are those of the authors and persons interviewed or surveyed during the course of the research, and not necessarily of the funders.
Background
Modern slavery and homelessness are two deeply interconnected social issues that continue to affect thousands of individuals across the United Kingdom. The intersection between these two issues reflects a broader systemic issue which includes immigration policy, access to public funds, trauma-informed care, and the availability of appropriate housing. Survivors of modern slavery have consistently reported gaps in the UK’s housing system, which can leave survivors without adequate support or, at worst, unsafe, unstable housing that is often left out in official homelessness data. Such conditions can perpetuate vulnerability and increase the risk of re-trafficking.
This research explored the housing challenges faced by survivors who only received outreach support under the Modern Slavery Victims Care Contract (MSVCC), with particular focus on the structural, legal, and practical barriers that contribute to housing insecurity. By investigating these challenges, this report aims to inform policy and practice, by highlighting examples of good practice and to propose actionable recommendations for improving housing outcomes for survivors.
The reports draws on survivor testimony, practitioner insights, and policy analysis to examine how current systems respond to survivors’ housing needs and where they may fall short.
A supplementary policy brief focuses on the barriers to housing for those who do not enter the National Referral Mechanism (NRM) and provides a series of recommendations on potential reforms on addressing this gap.
Key Findings
MSVCC outreach support is inconsistent. Many survivors are placed in asylum accommodation in hotels or left to navigate local authority systems. Some report months without meaningful contact.
Access to MSVCC accommodation may be restricted based on interpretations of housing entitlements. Survivors with UK nationality, refugee status, or access to public funds have reported that they were excluded from safehouse placements, even when experiencing street homeless, housing instability, or in unsafe living conditions.
Survivors with complex needs may face restrictions when accessing MSVCC safehouse accommodation. These individuals are often among the most vulnerable yet may be assessed as presenting too high risk for placement.
Local authority responses are inconsistent and fragmented. Survivors are frequently caught in a “ping-pong” between councils and MSVCC providers.
Risk and Needs Assessments sometimes lack trauma-informed depth. These assessments, conducted by MSVCC providers are frequently carried out remotely, which can limit attention to safety, housing issues, and survivor preferences.
Statutory guidance fails to reflect lived realities. Survivors accessing outreach support through the MSVCC are not explicitly referenced within the Homelessness Code of Guidance. As a result, their specific vulnerabilities may be overlooked when assessing priority need for social housing allocation.
Data and training gaps undermine accountability. The Home Office holds housing-related information that is not shared or analysed. Some MSVCC support workers lack detailed housing knowledge, while local authority staff are not always familiar with modern slavery frameworks, or vulnerabilities specific to survivors of modern slavery.
Survivors are experts in their own recovery. Participants called for person-centred support, greater transparency, and recognition of their specific needs, distinct from those of asylum seekers or general homelessness populations.
Key Recommendations
- Shape the amendment of Chapter 25 of the Homelessness Code of Guidance. This should reflect the unique vulnerabilities of modern slavery survivors who only receive outreach support under the MSVCC.
- Clarify the application of the MSVCC Assessing Destitution Guidance. This would ensure survivors with statutory entitlements are not excluded from safehouse accommodation following a positive Reasonable Grounds decision.
- Publish housing status data for survivors, to help enable evidence-based policy, service design and accountability.
- Embed housing suitability assessments into the Modern Slavery Statutory Guidance. Assessments must consider physical condition and safety of the property, accessibility and adaptations for disability, risk of violence or harassment, proximity to support networks, affordability and impact on employment or education.
- Introduce “modern slavery” as a recognised category on housing application forms. A formal category in housing applications would improve access, accountability and strategic planning. This is particularly important to UK nationals and falls into homelessness prevention.
- Enforce minimum face-to-face contact requirements in MSVCC outreach. Survivors should retain choice over meeting format, but a minimum threshold must be upheld to ensure meaningful engagement, accurate risk assessment and tailored housing support planning.
- Document safeguarding referrals in MSVCC housing needs assessments. Require MSVCC service providers to routinely record whether a safeguarding referral was made during housing needs assessments.
- Standardise survivor-led training for MSVCC support workers. Develop mandatory training modules co-produced with individuals with lived experience, focused on trauma-informed housing support, statutory duties and survivor-centred practice.
- Scale Modern Slavery Coordinators/Leads nationally. These roles should be embedded to support survivor assessments, facilitate multi-agency collaboration and advocate for trauma-informed housing solutions.
