Assessing the impact of the VOICES Care Act Toolkit on needs assessments for people experiencing Multiple Exclusion Homelessness

Multiple exclusion homelessness (MEH) describes how homelessness overlaps with other forms of social isolation, such as mental ill health, childhood trauma, experiences of the criminal justice system, and substance misuse (Fitzpatrick et al, 2011), and is underpinned by theoretical understandings of power and exclusion. Under the 2014 Act local authorities must conduct a needs assessment with anybody who appears to have needs for care and support (Care Act 2014, section 9(1)). As part of this assessment social workers must promote the service user's wellbeing (section 1). This has been interpreted as being a landmark in the personalisation of care (Cornes et al, 2016a).
Opening up mainstream social care and needs assessment is highly beneficial to those facing MEH, yet it also creates difficulties. It may be difficult to engage people with MEH given the nature of their lives. Moreover, it also requires social workers to now conduct needs assessments with a different service user group who may present with complex intersected needs.
The VOICES toolkit represents an innovation in engaging people with MEH, their supporters, and professionals, in the assessment process. It acts as a guide for all parties involved during the needs assessment process. Moreover, it represents a space in which different individual perspectives intersect, and can manage the power dynamics at play in these relationships by making the language of assessments more accessible. The aims of the toolkit are to assist needs assessments in a number of ways:
ensure that people with multiple needs"can record and communicate their needs as effectively as possible;
increase confidence among VOICES and other voluntary sector workers in working with the Care Act 2014;
support social workers (who may be unfamiliar with this "client group") to explore how multiple needs impact on the need for care and support; and
enable relationships and information exchange between these two groups of workers who may not have worked together previously.' (Cornes et al, 2016b, p.7).