M&M EvaluationYear 2: 2011-12

Housing Justice’s pilot mentoring and befriending

project

Project Aim

…To test and develop the

contribution that formal befriending schemes can make to ending rough sleeping by

supporting current and former rough sleepers…

Project Outcomes

• To improve clients’ confidence, motivation, social networks, mental well-being and use of time

• To increase the skills of volunteers to become befrienders and mentors

• To encourage the development of further volunteering and befriending schemes

• To continuously improve the quality of the scheme

Method

• 14 month project running from Jan 2011- March 2012

• Referrals from night shelters, day centres and agencies

Robes, Haringey and Kingston night shelters, Hope WorldWide, Connection at St Martins, St Mungos, the Manna Centre, the Marylebone Project

• 60 people attended mentoring trainings, some of whom were from organisations wishing to set up their own mentoringWest London YMCA, the Simon Community, night shelters

Method

• Clients choose if they want a mentor (goal focus) or befriender (social)

• Assessment and goal setting using the Outcomes Star

• Mentors and mentees meet for 1-2 hours/ week for 6 months

• Meetings take place in a public place

Support

• Introductory 3-way meeting• Coordinator calls both parties to

check in• Group supervision for mentors• Midway 3-way meeting• Closing meeting

Resource pack & support to set up independent mentoring

projects• Resource pack written for night

shelters interested in starting their own mentoring or befriending project

• Training or support offered to those wishing to set up their own mentoring or befriending project Connection Crew, London City Mission – Webber Street, Folkestone Night Shelter, West London YMCA, Simon Community, Street Lytes(Camden C4WS are successfully running their own mentoring project following support offered last year)

Mentors & Mentees…

• 14 successful relationships - lasted 6 mths

• In addition other 9 relationships were

set up but they didn’t last for the full 6 mths – reason for this were: - change in mentees’ circumstances - lack of motivation from mentee

M&M clients • Living in private rented accommodation or

supported housing

• Age range: 22 – 71• Average age: 44

• 3 female / 11 male

African 5 British 7 (5 White British and 2 Black British)

European 1 Pakistani 1

Volunteers

• 60 people attended mentoring trainings in year 2

• 36 people were in a position to be volunteer mentors in year 2 (i.e. applied, screened and trained)

• Of these 36, 15 had volunteered in year 1 and 21 were new

• As M&M is now ending, 15 volunteers are moving on to mentor with another charity

M&M Year 1 compared to year 2Year 1 (2010-11) Year 2 (2011-12)

No. of successful relationships 17 14

No. of relationships that weren’t fully ‘successful’

5 9

Age range of mentees 22-64 22-71

No. of women mentees 2 3

Evaluation method

A pre and post Outcome Star carried out on 14

clients

Semi structured interview conducted on 14 clients

Baseline data

Areas of greatest improvement

• Meaningful use of time - up 2.3 pts• Social network and relationships –

up 2.3pt• Motivation and taking responsibility

– up 1.7 points • Emotional and mental health - up

1.2 pts

M&M outcomes year 1 compared to year 2

Area of change Year 1 (2010-11)Outcome improvement

Year 2 (2011-12) Outcome improvement

meaningful use of time 2.1 2.3

social network and relationships 1.2 2.3

motivation and taking responsibility

0.9 1.7

emotional and mental health 1.6 1.2

overall 5.8 7.5

Areas of little or no change

• Living skills (0.9% change)• Substance use (0.3% change)• Managing tenancy (0.5%

change)• Physical health (0.3% change)• Offending (no change)

This is very similar to year 1

Mentees feedback

See Word document ‘In Mentees’ own words’ to read about the impact that some of the mentees feel the project has had on them.

Cost

• £36,000 direct project costs

• £2,570 per relationship • £24 - 26k cost per year of a

homelessness episode

http://www.homeless.org.uk/costs-homelessness

Bench marking

• Compared to agencies providing floating support using the Homeless Outcome Star the M&M Project had comparable outcomes (we had marginally higher success, 0.2%)

• This is impressive given that in the M&M Project the mentoring is carried out by volunteers, unlike staffed projects

Longitudinal impact – follow up on year 1 mentees

Of the 17 mentees from year 1, Jan- Dec 2010:

• 1 had passed away (heart attack)• 2 were uncontactable • 14 were contactable

Longitudinal impact – follow up on year 1 mentees

Of the 14:

• 6 were in work• 3 were homeless (1 squatting, 1 sofa surfing

and 1 sleeping rough)• 9 were in PRS, 1 in supported housing, 1 in

council housing

Longitudinal impact – follow up on year 1 mentees

• 4 mentees still met with their mentor regularly

Recommendations

• The M&M Project is ending for the time being and it is important that the learning from M&M is not lost.

• Housing Justice should retain capacity to support and train organisations working with homeless clients to run their own mentoring projects through:

Recommendations

• Promotion of the Toolkit• Running trainings tailored to the

agency• Providing consultancies• Not all agencies and projects are in a position

to start their own scheme, therefore HJ should continue to fundraise with a view to re-starting M&M as soon as possible.