The research contributes to understandings about the causes of, and solutions to, multiple exclusion homelessness in policy relevant ways by comparing and contrasting the priorities and agendas of single, multiply excluded homeless people (MEHP) with those of a variety of agencies that support or interact with them. MEHP are individuals who compound a current or recent experience of homelessness (i.e. rough sleeping, or living in emergency or insecure accommodation), with one or more other indicators of multiple or deep social exclusion, such as; poverty, long-term unemployment, chronic mental or physical ill- health, problematic substance use, and/or problematic transitions in institutional public duties of care e.g. local authority, prison. A key aim was to consider the extent to which, and how, the potentially differing priorities of MEHP and agencies may sustain or alleviate multiple exclusion homelessness. The project also explored MEHP journeys into homelessness to illuminate the relationship between background factors, personal circumstances and agency practices in people's homelessness stories. This study explores how far multiple exclusion homelessness might be explained by inconsistencies between the priorities of homeless people and those of supporting agencies. It aims to: (1) explore the relationship between homelessness and other factors in generating 'deep' social exclusion; (2) investigate the priorities and aspirations of multiply excluded homeless people in addressing the problems they face; (3) compare and contrast the priorities of multiply excluded homeless people with those of agencies that provide support services to multiply excluded homeless people; (4) examine the role of these potentially incompatible priorities in explaining multiple exclusion homelessness; (5) explore the ways in which place and gender may mediate these incompatible priorities; (6) validate the accounts of homeless people and their priorities by fully involving a team of formerly homeless volunteers in the design, conduct and outputs of this study; (7) disseminate findings among support agencies and policy makers so that policy and practice accords more closely with the priorities of multiply excluded homeless people. The project will be underpinned by an a user participatory methodology that utilises qualitative techniques (focus groups and semi-structured interviews) with 20 support agencies and 100 multiply excluded homeless people in Nottingham and London.

Purposive, non random sampling was used to identify suitable fieldwork participants. Two sets of semi structured qualitative interviews conducted in the City of Nottingham (55) and the London Boroughs of Lambeth, Southwark and Lewisham (53) with a total of 108 single multiply excluded homeless people (MEHP): 74 men, 34 women. Homeless participants were recruited from a range of organisations. They included people who used, (or who had recently used), an assortment of services provided by Framework and Thames Reach and also users of various services offered by a number of other statutory and voluntary agencies. Additionally, semi-structured interviews with 44 key informants (24 Nottingham, 20 London), that is, managers and frontline workers from 40 statutory and voluntary sector agencies which support, or routinely come into contact with MEHP, were conducted.