Fourteenth Report - Homes for Ukraine

We are concerned that the risk of homelessness among Ukrainians in the UK is likely to increase as more sponsorships end or break down. There is no obligation for UK sponsors to host Ukrainian guests for the whole time they … Read more We are concerned that the risk of homelessness among Ukrainians in the UK is likely to increase as more sponsorships end or break down. There is no obligation for UK sponsors to host Ukrainian guests for the whole time they are in the UK, with the UK government only asking them to commit to hosting for a minimum of six months. The government has extended thank you payments into a third year to encourage them to continue their sponsorship. However, there is a risk that a Ukrainian’s relationship with their sponsor can break down. DLUHC’s initial planning assumption was that 50% of sponsorships could break down, but it does not have complete data on how many relationships have done so. By the end of August 2023, local authorities had reported that 4,890 Ukrainian households in England who were in the UK on Homes for Ukraine visas had been homeless or come within 56 days of being homeless. Since the start of 2023, at any one time, between 600 and 800 Ukrainian households have been living in temporary accommodation in England, although DLUHC does not know how many of these households are part of the Homes for Ukraine scheme. Around 30% of English local authorities do not regularly provide homelessness data to DLUHC on those Ukrainians who are in the UK under the scheme. DLUHC has announced a total of £270 million of funding to support local authorities to invest in homelessness prevention, including to support Ukrainian households that no longer have a scheme sponsor. Recommendation 2: DLUHC should, as part of its Treasury Minute response, set out what action it will take to: • increase the number of local authorities that regularly provide homelessness data returns; and 6 Homes for Ukraine • secure an adequate supply of sponsors for the scheme in the future in a cost-effective way. Show less

The Home Office’s failure to meet its targets for processing visas is leaving some Ukrainians facing an unacceptably long wait for decisions to be made on their applications. Initially visa turnaround times for the scheme were longer than the Home … Read more The Home Office’s failure to meet its targets for processing visas is leaving some Ukrainians facing an unacceptably long wait for decisions to be made on their applications. Initially visa turnaround times for the scheme were longer than the Home Office wanted. In March 2022, of the 26,000 applications received, 18% were processed within five working days and 21% took more than 15 working days. To speed up the process, the Home Office introduced measures such as: deferring the collection of biometrics; increasing the number of people from the Home Office and other government departments working on the scheme from around 165 staff in March 2022, to over 1,000 by June 2022 working across all the Ukraine schemes; and rolling out new digital systems to increase flexibility of working and productivity. These measures helped improve visa turnaround times in April and May 2022. However, despite the changes the Home Office implemented, visa turnaround times have taken longer since June 2022. Almost two-thirds (63%) of visa applications were taking more than the 15 working day target to be processed in July 2023, compared to 19% in June 2022. The Home Office asserts that it is building its capacity to process visas in case there is a surge in applications for this scheme as well as to respond to other areas of high demand in the Home Office, such as asylum processing. Recommendation 3a: The Home Office should, as part of its Treasury Minute response, set out what action it will take to meet its targets in future, and what plans it has in place to respond should there be a future surge in applications. b) The Home Office should publish quarterly updates on visa processing times for the remainder of the Scheme. Show less

DLUHC is making decisions about future funding of the scheme without a proper understanding of how effective funding has been in supporting those taking part in the scheme to date. Local authorities initially received funding of £10,500 per arrival. Since … Read more DLUHC is making decisions about future funding of the scheme without a proper understanding of how effective funding has been in supporting those taking part in the scheme to date. Local authorities initially received funding of £10,500 per arrival. Since 31 December 2022, DLUHC has reduced this to £5,900 for each arrival. DLUHC considers that local authorities’ costs decreased once the scheme had been set up. Although DLUHC has mandated local authorities to provide data on the use of its funding for 2023–24, the Department still relies on voluntary reporting on how many people on the scheme are currently experiencing homelessness to inform future funding decisions. Despite the lack of complete data, DLUHC increased funding to prevent homelessness in the 2023 Autumn Statement as it considers it understands the housing pressures local authorities are facing. Similarly, the government announced an extension of thank you payments for a third year in the 2023 Autumn Statement, but could not estimate how many sponsor relationships would have broken down if thank you payments had not been extended. DLUHC asserts that to set up the scheme at pace and respond to emerging issues, it needed to balance getting a full picture of how the scheme operates against over-burdening local authorities. Recommendation 4: DLUHC should, as part of its Treasury Minute response, explain: Homes for Ukraine 7 • what evidence it used as the basis for its decision to continue funding thank you payments and the additional homelessness prevention funding announced at the autumn statement; and • how it will ensure that is has a robust evidence base going forward so that any future funding is targeted towards the most effective interventions and where there is most need. Show less

The scheme was set up at speed and has helped 141,200 Ukrainians come to the UK, but DLUHC does not know fully what aspects of the scheme have or have not worked and whether overall the scheme has been value … Read more The scheme was set up at speed and has helped 141,200 Ukrainians come to the UK, but DLUHC does not know fully what aspects of the scheme have or have not worked and whether overall the scheme has been value for money. DLUHC has gathered some, largely qualitative, information on how well the scheme is working, but it has not yet set a timeframe for a full formal evaluation. DLUHC originally planned to complete an evaluation by autumn 2023, but it paused work on this in spring 2023. DLUHC acknowledges there is a need for lessons to be learned for future resettlement schemes but does not at the moment consider that Homes for Ukraine should automatically be used as a blueprint for other similar events. DLUHC assert that the scheme represents value for money as the cost of accommodation is likely to be lower within the Homes for Ukraine scheme than for other resettlement schemes. However, it does not have clear evidence of the overall value for money of the scheme once other elements of scheme funding have been factored in. Recommendation 5: As part of its Treasury Minute response, DLUHC should set out what plans it has to evaluate the scheme, both while it is still ongoing and at the end of the scheme. These evaluations should include: • how lessons learned from the scheme, and best practice examples, could be used for potential future resettlement schemes; and • a consideration of the overall value for money of the scheme. Show less

DLUHC has not yet assessed what it will do when its current contract with Palantir to provide the scheme’s main data system ends in September 2024. In order to set the scheme up quickly, in March 2022, DLUHC accepted an … Read more DLUHC has not yet assessed what it will do when its current contract with Palantir to provide the scheme’s main data system ends in September 2024. In order to set the scheme up quickly, in March 2022, DLUHC accepted an offer from Palantir, a company on the public sector framework agreement for digital services, to provide six months of free support to create its main data system to manage and monitor scheme data. Following the free six-month trial period, DLUHC signed a 12-month contract with Palantir worth £4.5 million, excluding VAT, without any competitive process. In September 2023, it extended the contract with Palantir for a further 12-months, valued at £5.5 million, excluding VAT. The Government’s Chief Commercial Officer wrote to Palantir noting his concern about the practice of offering services to public sector customers for a zero or nominal cost to gain a commercial foothold, contrary to the principles of public procurement which usually require open competition. DLUHC is conscious of some of the criticism of the way that this contract was set up at the very beginning, and is working on a timetable to extend or re-tender the contract. However, we are nonetheless concerned that DLUHC may find it challenging to run a fully competitive procurement process before the current contract ends in September 2024. Recommendation 6: DLUHC should, as part of its Treasury Minute response, set out its assessment of its commercial options once the current Palantir contract 8 Homes for Ukraine expires. If this includes extending the contract with Palantir, DLUHC should explain how this is justified under current procurement regulations. In particular, how such a decision would be consistent with the Government Chief Commercial Officer’s concerns about departments accepting IT companies’ offers to provide free trial periods to gain a commercial foothold. Homes for Ukraine 9 1 Homes for Ukraine Visas Show less

On the basis of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence from the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities (DLUHC) and the Home Office about the Homes for Ukraine Scheme.1

We raised our concerns about the challenges facing Ukrainians whose visas are coming to an end. We also asked the Home Office when it thought it would make a decision so it could provide reassurance to those taking part in … Read more We raised our concerns about the challenges facing Ukrainians whose visas are coming to an end. We also asked the Home Office when it thought it would make a decision so it could provide reassurance to those taking part in the scheme, especially those who do not have a home to go back to because it had been destroyed. The Home Office could not give us a date for when it would make a decision on extending visas. However, it did tell us that it was working with its Ministers and DLUHC, among others, on options both for extension of the current scheme and development of the scheme beyond 2025. The Home Office assured us that it would make any decisions well in advance of people’s visas ending.10 Processing of visas Show less

The Home Office is responsible for processing the visas of those applying to be part of the scheme. By January 2024 the Home Office had received 219,800 visa applications and issued 178,600 visas to people.11 The NAO found that at … Read more The Home Office is responsible for processing the visas of those applying to be part of the scheme. By January 2024 the Home Office had received 219,800 visa applications and issued 178,600 visas to people.11 The NAO found that at the start of the scheme, the Home Office had not set out target turnaround times for processing visas, as it simply wanted to process them as quickly as possible. In March 2022, the first month that applications were open, of the 26,000 applications received, just 18% were processed within five working days and 21% took more than 15 working days.12 Show less

Prior to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, those applying for any type of UK visa had to attend a visa application centre to give their biometrics before they came to the UK. The Home Office told us that for obvious reasons … Read more Prior to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, those applying for any type of UK visa had to attend a visa application centre to give their biometrics before they came to the UK. The Home Office told us that for obvious reasons it had had to shut its visa application centre in Lviv, Ukraine. It explained that after the start of the war it had very quickly set up a new visa application centre over the border in Warsaw, as it was aware that large numbers of people were already moving there. However, it then realised that this was adding unnecessary steps and delay to the visa application process, so it took further action to try and speed up the application process for Ukrainians wanting to apply to come to the UK. Firstly, on 10 March 2022, the Home Secretary announced that attendance at a visa application centre would no longer be required for Ukrainians with valid international passports. Instead, Ukrainians could apply online, uploading a scan of their passport, and give their biometrics after they had arrived in the UK. Then, on 18 May 2022, the Home Office implemented another new digital route which allowed applicants to provide biometric information online rather than when they arrived in the UK.13 9 Qq 15, 16 and 24 10 Qq 14–16, 19–20 11 Home Office, Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme (Homes for Ukraine) visa data, (accessed 16 January 2024) 12 C&AG’s Report paras 2.7–2.8 13 Q 10; C&AG’s Report para 2.9 Homes for Ukraine 11 Show less

The Home Office also increased the number of people working on the Homes for Ukraine scheme. From a minimum of 165 staff working on the scheme in March 2022, this number grew to over 1,000 by June 2022 working across … Read more The Home Office also increased the number of people working on the Homes for Ukraine scheme. From a minimum of 165 staff working on the scheme in March 2022, this number grew to over 1,000 by June 2022 working across all Ukraine schemes. This included 554 officials from HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) and the Department for Work & Pensions (DWP). By April and May 2022, 95% and 87% of cases were processed within 15 working days respectively. By July 2023, the Home Office had processed 77% of the more than 182,000 visa applications it had received within 15 working days. However, the turnaround times have largely taken longer since June 2022. The number of applications which took, or will take, more than 15 working days to process increased from 19% of applications submitted in June 2022 to 63% in July 2023.14 Show less

The NAO reported that the Home Office believed several issues contributed to slower turnaround times. These included: technical changes to the application process; an influx of applications when the Scottish Government announced it would be pausing the super sponsorship scheme; … Read more The NAO reported that the Home Office believed several issues contributed to slower turnaround times. These included: technical changes to the application process; an influx of applications when the Scottish Government announced it would be pausing the super sponsorship scheme; and the impact of staff being moved back to other roles. The Home Office also deferred some cases, which caused delays. The Home Office told us that deferring cases was often because it was awaiting policy decisions such as on how to treat sponsor applications from Ukrainians living in the UK. If deferred cases are excluded, of 135,539 applications received by July 2023, 90% were processed within 15 working days.15 Show less

We were concerned about the impact of processing the volume of visa applications received as part of the Homes for Ukraine scheme would have on other visa routes. We therefore asked the Home Office what it was doing to ensure … Read more We were concerned about the impact of processing the volume of visa applications received as part of the Homes for Ukraine scheme would have on other visa routes. We therefore asked the Home Office what it was doing to ensure an adequate standard of service across other areas. The Home Office told us that it had brought in additional resources into the Home Office and grown its caseworking teams across the Department, and that it was training people in different ways so they could work flexibly across the organisation.16 Show less

We asked what would happen if there was a sudden surge in applications under the scheme and whether the Home Office would have sufficient capacity to support such a surge whilst maintaining standards of service in other areas of its … Read more We asked what would happen if there was a sudden surge in applications under the scheme and whether the Home Office would have sufficient capacity to support such a surge whilst maintaining standards of service in other areas of its work. The Home Office explained that there were a number of reasons why it could support such a surge. These included having the resources it needed, the flexibility to deploy people to different pressures in the organisation as they emerged, and through automating and transforming its systems, which had increased productivity. The Home Office also told us that it was seeking to standardise all of its visa processing and more of its asylum processing, which would reduce the time taken to train somebody to work across any of its processes.17 14 C&AG’s Report paras 2.9–2.10 15 Q 9; C&AG’s Report para 2.11 16 Qq 73–75 17 Qq 74–75 12 Homes for Ukraine 2 Support and sponsorship within the scheme Show less

Total central government funding for the scheme was £2.1 billion by the end of September 2023. DLUHC provided £1.9 billion of the funding, of which most (£1.1 billion) had gone to local authorities to support each Ukrainian on the scheme … Read more Total central government funding for the scheme was £2.1 billion by the end of September 2023. DLUHC provided £1.9 billion of the funding, of which most (£1.1 billion) had gone to local authorities to support each Ukrainian on the scheme in their first year in the UK. DLUHC set this funding initially at £10,500 per Ukrainian, and then reduced it to £5,900 for all arrivals after 31 December 2022.18 We asked DLUHC why it had reduced the amounts per person paid to local authorities. DLUHC explained that one reason was that local authorities had incurred a lot of costs in setting up the scheme, for example in setting up new systems and getting the right staff in place. DLUHC’s assumption was that these set-up costs had decreased as the scheme had gone on. Although local authorities taking part in the scheme have received funding from DLUHC since March 2022, DLUHC only made it mandatory for them to report back on how they had spent the money from 2023– Show less

We questioned the usefulness of the spend data DLUHC had collected from local authorities, given it was often qualitative and provided voluntarily.19 DLUHC stressed that from the start it had needed to balance the demand for data against placing a … Read more We questioned the usefulness of the spend data DLUHC had collected from local authorities, given it was often qualitative and provided voluntarily.19 DLUHC stressed that from the start it had needed to balance the demand for data against placing a burden on local authorities.20 Preventing homelessness Show less

In December 2022, DLUHC announced £650 million of funding for local authorities through a Local Authority Housing Fund, of which £500 million was to acquire housing stock, and £150 million for homelessness prevention more widely. This funding aimed to assist … Read more In December 2022, DLUHC announced £650 million of funding for local authorities through a Local Authority Housing Fund, of which £500 million was to acquire housing stock, and £150 million for homelessness prevention more widely. This funding aimed to assist reducing homelessness for people within the local authority, including those on the Homes for Ukraine scheme. Local authorities must spend any money allocated under these schemes before the end of March 2024 and can use it to fund a wide range of actions to support Ukrainians into sustainable accommodation, including to support them to access the private rented sector, for employment support, to pay for temporary accommodation, and to encourage hosts to continue to house their guests.21 In November 2023, the government announced that it was providing a further £120 million of funding to invest in to invest in homelessness prevention, including to support Ukrainian households who could no longer remain in sponsorship.22 Show less

The NAO found that DLUHC did not accurately know how many people on the scheme were likely to become homeless soon or had already experienced homelessness, as 30% of English local authorities regularly failed to provide homelessness data on the … Read more The NAO found that DLUHC did not accurately know how many people on the scheme were likely to become homeless soon or had already experienced homelessness, as 30% of English local authorities regularly failed to provide homelessness data on the scheme to DLUHC.23 We therefore asked DLHUC why it did not have a full and accurate picture of the situation. DLHUC recognised that “not all local authorities provide this data and not all of them provide it consistently” but told us that the vast majority submitted “at least some data”. It asserted that it did not have any reason to suggest that those who were not providing data were outliers, or that the overall position on homelessness was more 18 C&AG’s Report para 3.2 19 Qq 38–42 20 Qq 25 and 32 21 C&AG’s Report para 4.16 22 HM Government, Autumn Statement 2023, CP977, November 2023 23 Q 47; C&AG’s Report para 4.12 Homes for Ukraine 13 serious in those places than in areas that were reporting it.24 DLUHC told us that the last data return had been submitted by more than 70% of local authorities and considered that the data it did receive was representative and sufficient to track trends so that it could respond accordingly with policy interventions.25 Show less

DLUHC told us that it would like to avoid any of those taking part in the scheme from experiencing homelessness or the risk of homelessness, but noted that the current levels were “relatively low”.26 The NAO found that between 24 … Read more DLUHC told us that it would like to avoid any of those taking part in the scheme from experiencing homelessness or the risk of homelessness, but noted that the current levels were “relatively low”.26 The NAO found that between 24 February 2022 and 31 August 2023, 4,890 households in England on Homes for Ukraine visas had at some point been homeless or had come within 56 days of being homeless. The NAO found that the data held by DLUHC did not show for how long people on the scheme were at risk of homelessness or experienced homelessness, nor how many people on the scheme were currently affected. The data did, however, show that since the start of 2023, at any one time, roughly 600 to 800 Ukrainian households (whether on Homes for Ukraine visas or resident in the UK through a different path) had been living in temporary accommodation in England. An ONS survey in spring 2023, of people on the scheme who arrived before 15 June 2022, suggested that 4% of people in this group were living in temporary or emergency accommodation provided by the council or did not have anywhere to live.27 Show less

DLLUHC told us that 790 Ukrainian households taking part in the scheme were currently in temporary accommodation, and 8% were either experiencing or at risk of experiencing homelessness at any particular time.28 We asked DLUHC how it would respond in … Read more DLLUHC told us that 790 Ukrainian households taking part in the scheme were currently in temporary accommodation, and 8% were either experiencing or at risk of experiencing homelessness at any particular time.28 We asked DLUHC how it would respond in the event of an increase in the levels of homelessness or risk of homelessness for those taking part in the scheme, particularly given the severe pressures on levels of homelessness in the general population. It told us that it was conscious of the housing pressures being faced by local authorities and had recognised this by providing extra funding to precent homelessness. It explained that in many cases homelessness had been prevented or subsequently dealt with by local authorities using the homelessness prevention money.29 Thank you payments for sponsors Show less

Any adult in the UK can act as a sponsor providing they pass eligibility checks conducted by the Home Office and local authorities. Sponsors are expected to offer accommodation for at least six months, although many relationships have lasted longer … Read more Any adult in the UK can act as a sponsor providing they pass eligibility checks conducted by the Home Office and local authorities. Sponsors are expected to offer accommodation for at least six months, although many relationships have lasted longer and some have ended before then. By end of March 2023, DLUHC had spent £100 million on thank you payments made to sponsors to recognise their role in providing accommodation to Ukrainians.30 In November 2023, the government extended ‘thank you’ payments of £500 a month into a third year for sponsors so that Ukrainians could stay with them for the full three year period of their visas.31 24 Q 32 25 Qq 46–48 26 Qq 32–34 27 C&AG’s Report para 4.12 28 Q 32 29 Q 33–34 30 C&AG’s Report 3.6 31 Qq 12, 20, 57; HM Government, Autumn Statement 2023, November 2023, para 4.107, 5.199 14 Homes for Ukraine Show less

DLUHC’s initial planning assumption had been that 50% of sponsorships could breakdown, leading to homelessness.32 We asked DLUHC what impact the decision to extend thank you payments would have on sustaining sponsor-host relationships and what analysis it had done to … Read more DLUHC’s initial planning assumption had been that 50% of sponsorships could breakdown, leading to homelessness.32 We asked DLUHC what impact the decision to extend thank you payments would have on sustaining sponsor-host relationships and what analysis it had done to inform its decision to extend payments for another year. DLUHC explained that it had taken the decision based on the number of thank you payments paid out and the number of people still in sponsorship and on the findings of surveys by the Office for National Statistics on the importance of thank you payments. It also told us that thank you payments had an psychological impact in terms of recognising the contribution that people were making. DLUHC acknowledged, however, that thank you payments would not address all the challenges and barriers faced by hosts, such as language barriers or simply not wanting to share their home any longer.33 We asked whether it had been possible to quantify the number of sponsor-host relationships that were at risk of breaking down if the thank you payments had not been continued. DLUHC admitted that is had been difficult to quantify that exactly, because it depended on individual circumstances, but it considered it had a good sense of the impact.34 32 C&AG’s Report para 4.11 33 Qq 57–58 34 Q 59 Homes for Ukraine 15 3 Learning lessons and future challenges Collating and sharing data Show less

At the start of the scheme, DLUHC identified a need to share data between itself, the Home Office and local authorities, including data on the subsequent movement of Ukrainians after their arrival into the UK. DLUHC chose to accept an … Read more At the start of the scheme, DLUHC identified a need to share data between itself, the Home Office and local authorities, including data on the subsequent movement of Ukrainians after their arrival into the UK. DLUHC chose to accept an offer from a company called Palantir to use its data system on a pro-bono basis for the first six months, with Palantir waiving an estimated fee of £3.25 million. In September 2022, following the end of the six-month free trial period, DLUHC directly awarded a 12-month contract to Palantir worth £4.5 million, excluding VAT.35 Show less

In February 2023, the Government’s Chief Commercial Officer wrote to Palantir noting his concern about the practice of offering services to public sector customers for a zero or nominal cost to gain a commercial foothold, contrary to the principles of … Read more In February 2023, the Government’s Chief Commercial Officer wrote to Palantir noting his concern about the practice of offering services to public sector customers for a zero or nominal cost to gain a commercial foothold, contrary to the principles of public procurement which usually require open competition. The Chief Commercial Officer’s advice was copied to senior digital and procurement officials in government alongside confirmation that free trial contracts should be avoided by government customers and only used in exceptional circumstances. Given a number of challenges, including those of migrating to a new system, in September 2023, DLUHC extended the contract with Palantir for a further 12 months, valued at £5.5 million, excluding VAT, i.e. £10 million for a 30 month provision.36 Show less

The current contract with Palantir is due to end in September 2024. We therefore asked DLUHC what its plans were after 2024. DLUHC told us it would look “very closely” at next steps and would take a decision at the … Read more The current contract with Palantir is due to end in September 2024. We therefore asked DLUHC what its plans were after 2024. DLUHC told us it would look “very closely” at next steps and would take a decision at the “appropriate moment”.37 We challenged the Department on when an appropriate moment would be given the end of the current contract was less than a year away. It told us that it was “constantly looking at what data and digital solution we need to run the programme and to enable the data flows” between the organisations involved, and that it would continue to do so when considering its requirements for the future.38 It noted that it could extend the Palantir contract one more time for one more year. DLUHC acknowledged the criticism it had received about how the contract had been set up at the beginning, and that it did not want to end up in a situation where it had no options, but that it was waiting for policy decisions to be made by Ministers.39 We therefore asked DLUHC about whether DLUHC would have enough time to run a procurement exercise if it needed to and what was its point of no return. DLUHC said that it did not know precisely when this was, but that it was working closely with commercial colleagues to work out an appropriate timetable.40 Show less

The NAO found that in early 2023, DLUHC had conducted an exercise to identify the lessons that could be learned from the scheme’s sponsorship model. That exercise included recommendations to government on the running of the current scheme, and on … Read more The NAO found that in early 2023, DLUHC had conducted an exercise to identify the lessons that could be learned from the scheme’s sponsorship model. That exercise included recommendations to government on the running of the current scheme, and on the design of any future emergency sponsorship schemes. DLUHC was also developing a ‘playbook,’ drawing primarily on the lessons from Homes for Ukraine, to aid officials in future to design any future emergency sponsorship schemes.42 Show less

We asked DLUHC whether it would be commissioning a fuller evaluation of the scheme. DLUHC had originally planned a process-focused evaluation, which it intended to complete by autumn 2023, but it paused work on this in spring 2023. DLUHC told … Read more We asked DLUHC whether it would be commissioning a fuller evaluation of the scheme. DLUHC had originally planned a process-focused evaluation, which it intended to complete by autumn 2023, but it paused work on this in spring 2023. DLUHC told us that it did not have a timeframe for an evaluation. While it accepted that it was right to learn lessons, and that it had been “looking at a lot of insights as we have gone along”, it told us that in the meantime it could not be assumed that the Homes for Ukraine scheme was a response to an unusual set of circumstances and not necessarily a blueprint that could easily be applied elsewhere.43 Show less

We asked DLUHC about the value for money of the scheme. DLUHC told us that it thought the cost of scheme was much lower than for other resettlement schemes. It explained that the cost per night of the accommodation was … Read more We asked DLUHC about the value for money of the scheme. DLUHC told us that it thought the cost of scheme was much lower than for other resettlement schemes. It explained that the cost per night of the accommodation was lower as sponsors provided the accommodation.44 Thank you payments equated to costs of £6 per person per night (£8 once increased to £500 after 12 months) compared with £98 per person per night for Afghans being hosted in hotels. This calculation, however, did not factor in additional funding that was available under the Homes for Ukraine scheme, for example, £150 million of funding given to local authorities for homelessness prevention.45 DLUHC also considered that, although hard-to-quantify, the support offered by sponsors to individuals, would otherwise have fallen on the public purse to help people into appropriate education or training or work opportunities. The Home Office noted that it was difficult to measure the value for money of a humanitarian scheme, because it was about saving people’s lives, but told us that it had spent just over £50 million on resourcing the scheme.46 41 Letter to Committee of Public Accounts from Permanent Secretary, Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, 7 December 2023 42 C&AG’s Report para 4.21 43 Qq 78–79; C&AG’s Report paras 4.22 44 Qq 76–77 45 C&AG’s Report para 3.7 46 Qq 76–77 Homes for Ukraine 17 Show less