Inspection finds poor quality data collection, insufficient stakeholder engagement, and limited communication with asylum seekers
A comprehensive new report on contingency asylum accommodation by the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration (ICIBI) was published last week.
The 115-page report can be downloaded here. It examines the Home Office's use of temporary accommodation required when regular asylum facilities reach capacity. Contingency accommodation primarily includes hotels and hostels, plus additional large sites like Napier Barracks, Wethersfield (a former Ministry of Defence site), and the Bibby Stockholm vessel at Portland Port.
As of December 31, 2023, nearly half (46.9%) of asylum seekers in Home Office-provided housing were in contingency facilities. Some 415 individual facilities were in use on 28 November 2023, though this figure fell to 245 by the end of June 2024 due to a decrease in the use of hotels.
David Bolt, who is serving as the interim ICIBI, noted that the inspection report identifies a number of areas of concern, including poor quality data collection, inconsistent contract compliance, insufficient stakeholder engagement, and limited communication with asylum seekers about their status.
As Bolt further noted, similar concerns have featured in many previous ICIBI inspection reports, covering other areas of the Home Office's work. In particular, Bolt has harsh words for the Home Office's long-standing failure to engage meaningfully with stakeholders, highlighting a pattern of one-sided communication that undermines trust.
In its key findings, the report states: "Lack of meaningful engagement with stakeholders and poor communication ('one-way', telling rather than listening) by the Home Office's Migration and Borders System (and its forerunners) about policies, practices and plans has been a recurring theme of inspections over many years. Here, the department has recognised the importance of engaging and communicating with those stakeholders on whose active support it is reliant, and reported good progress locally, at Portland, for example.
"Meanwhile, it has been much less effective in engaging constructively with some of the more critical stakeholders, including some non-governmental organisations (NGOs) who have been providing direct support to individuals in contingency asylum accommodation. While some are opposed in principle to the department's approach to accommodating asylum seekers, with common ground hard to find, it is clear that the Home Office still has a long way to go with potential partners and critics alike to build trust and confidence in its willingness to be open and honest about its intentions and performance, and any reluctance to share information, whether real or perceived, will be seen as evidence that it is not."
Inspectors found there was a significant gap in communication for those in contingency accommodation regarding their asylum claims, which left asylum seekers uncertain as to what was happening to them. David Bolt noted that the impact of such uncertainty on the mental health and wellbeing of asylum seekers was all too evident through the inspection.
The report says: "None of the staff working at contingency asylum accommodation sites, whether for the accommodation provider, its subcontractors, or for the Home Office, was able to provide any information about an individual's asylum claim. The Home Office staff consistently highlighted the lack of updates on service users' asylum claims as a major source of frustration and detrimental to service users' wellbeing. Accommodation provider and subcontractor staff reported that they felt helpless in supporting service users, as they were not familiar with the asylum process and were therefore unable to alleviate any concerns. Migrant Help were present on site at Napier but not elsewhere at the time of the inspection, though there were plans for them to be onsite at Wethersfield. But their remit under the Advice, Issue Reporting and Eligibility (AIRE) contract does not extend to providing updates on individual claims. The ICIBI previously drew attention to this issue in 2021, since when it would appear no meaningful progress has been made."
Information and record keeping was "limited and unreliable", with the ICIBI stressing: "Overall, the data that the Home Office holds and the management information it generates in relation to service users and asylum accommodation (not solely contingency accommodation) is not fit for purpose. It is easy to blame this on IT, the functionality of which is admittedly an issue. However, more fundamentally, the problem is a failure to recognise that effective decision making at every level (strategic, operational, case-specific) relies on maintaining detailed, accurate, up-to-date, retrievable records."
While the standard of accommodation varied, all of the sites inspected aimed to provide at least a basic level of safety and security for asylum seekers. There were, however, specific health and safety risks at Wethersfield and the Bibby Stockholm, including legionella in the water system, and there were incidents of disorder and violence at some other facilities. Record keeping of health and safety incidents needs to be improved, the ICIBI finds, as otherwise it is hard to see how the Home Office can show it is meeting its responsibilities for the safety and welfare of contingency asylum accommodation service users.
Nine recommendations are made in the report, and David Bolt said he was pleased to see that all were fully or partially accepted by the Home Office.