You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles
Latest housing research: Homes without beds, systems under strain
Separate reports on furniture poverty and the homelessness workforce cover very different issues, but both shed light on how we define adequacy in housing, writes Philip Brown, professor of housing and communities at the University of Huddersfield and member of the Thinkhouse Editorial Panel
Latest housing research: Homes without beds, systems under strain #UKhousingSeparate reports on furniture poverty and the homelessness workforce cover very different issues, but both shed light on how we define adequacy in housing, writes Professor Philip Brown #UKhousingThinkhouse is a website set up to be a repository of housing research. Its editorial panel critiques and collates the best of the most recent housing research.
Two recent reports landed in the Thinkhouse folder that, once again, say something uncomfortable about the state of housing policy in the UK.
One looks inside the home, the other looks at the workforce trying to respond when that home is absent or unstable. Very different topics, but both point to the same issue: housing policy continues to focus too narrowly for the realities people are living through.
The first report, The Extent of Furniture Poverty 2026: A Public Health Crisis, from charity End Furniture Poverty, makes a simple but powerful claim: a home is not secured when a tenancy begins, it is secured when people can live in it.
The report estimates that millions of essential items remain missing from UK homes, with no meaningful improvement since 2022. Around four million adults and one million children are living without at least one basic item, such as a bed, cooker or fridge. This should be a cause for alarm as these numbers point to a structural problem, not a marginal one.
The consequences are also direct and measurable. Over a quarter of people experiencing furniture poverty report severe impact on physical health and nearly a third report severe impact on mental health.
This is hardly surprising when you consider the wide-ranging effects the most basic of items can have. Not having a bed affects sleep, recovery and child development, while the lack of a fridge or cooker shapes diet, nutrition and routine. Not having a table or sitting space changes how families eat, study and interact. Missing flooring or curtains affect safety, dignity and privacy.
These are far from peripheral concerns; they directly contribute to impacts felt in our health, care and education systems. What the report does particularly well is show that this is not simply about income poverty, it’s also about how housing systems distribute material conditions.
Social renters are four times more likely to experience furniture poverty than homeowners. That finding should give the social housing sector something to reflect on, as the tenure designed to provide security is also where material deprivation is most concentrated.
Unfurnished tenancies remain the default – the report describes these as “empty boxes”, often without flooring or basic fittings. For those households arriving from homelessness, domestic abuse or crisis, this shows that securing a tenancy in these conditions merely relocates instability, it does not resolve it.
The second report, Mapping the Homelessness Workforce, from charity body Homeless Link and commissioned by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, offers a different vantage point as it looks at the people in the workforce who respond when these systems fail.
As most in the field will know, demand is rising. In 2023-24, more than 324,000 households were assessed as owed a homelessness duty, with more than 131,000 in temporary accommodation. At the same time, the workforce itself is under strain. The vacancy rate across the sector is around 7%, pay levels are below national averages, particularly in frontline roles, and nearly half of staff report being at risk of burnout.
There is also an increasing complexity of need among people seeking support. This is a system working hard at the point of crisis, while upstream conditions continue to generate that crisis.
Reading through these reports, I saw an immediate connection relating to how we define adequacy in housing. Policy frameworks still overwhelmingly tend to treat housing outcomes in binary terms. Housed or not housed. Temporary or settled. Supply delivered or not delivered.
Yet, the lived reality is far more granular. A tenancy without basic furnishings produces and maintains instability that can resemble aspects of homelessness. It affects health, routine, financial resilience and the ability to sustain that tenancy.
The workforce report shows what happens when these conditions accumulate. Services are dealing with higher need, greater complexity and longer-term cases. The system therefore absorbs the consequences of earlier system design choices.
Four million
Adults living without at least one basic household item, such as a bed, cooker or fridge
324,000
Households assessed as owed a homelessness duty in 2023-24
7%
Estimated job vacancy rate across the sector in 2025
There is also a financial dimension here that is often underplayed. The furniture poverty report notes that investment in basic household provision generates significant public savings, including reduced demand on health services and homelessness systems. Reading these reports side by side, you can see this very clearly.
Without upfront investment in liveable homes, costs appear later in health, welfare and crisis services. Then the absence of material stability means that tenancies are harder to sustain, which increases churn and creates pressure in the system. Ultimately, without adequate structures of support, the burden shifts to an already stretched workforce.
I can see at least three implications. First, housing standards need to move beyond structure to function. A decent home is not only one that is safe and compliant – it is also one that enables everyday life. This includes access to essential furniture and appliances as a baseline, not an add-on.
Second, prevention needs to be understood materially. Early intervention is often framed in terms of advice, support or behavioural change. These matter, but so do the physical conditions of the home. A bed, a cooker or flooring can be preventative infrastructure.
Third, workforce pressures are red lights in a system. Burnout, vacancies and retention issues are not only immediate workforce problems, they are the effects of a wider system.
Housing policy often works with large numbers – homes delivered, households assisted, units funded. These reports bring attention back to smaller units: beds, tables, staff hours and individual caseloads. Paying attention to these fundamentals – yes, sweating the small stuff – is what enables stability and security at scale.
Philip Brown, professor of housing and communities, University of Huddersfield, and member, Thinkhouse Editorial Panel
Sign up to Inside Housing’s Daily News bulletin
Sign up to Inside Housing’s Daily News bulletin, featuring the latest social housing news delivered to your inbox.
Already have an account? Click here to manage your newsletters.
Related stories
