Results from the Civil Society EUSS Alliance surveys

In 2023 we began to survey members of the Civil Society EUSS Alliance every 3 months on a range of areas including location, client demographics and background, caseload, and current enquiries and issues. The aim of the surveys has been to provide a snapshot of the work going on in the sector, as well as a way to track changes, and challenges the sector is experiencing over the months.

Over 150 individuals are sent the survey, but responses may come from different organisations each time depending on capacity. In addition, questions asked in the surveys differ slightly between months, in response to emerging issues or changes to policy and implementation, or discussions taking place in Alliance meetings and other fora.

This webpage displays a highlight of the results.

Who are your clients?

Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities

Homeless/rough sleepers

People with disabilities and/or serious health conditions (e.g. physical or mental impairments)

Victims of modern slavery and/or trafficking

Deportation orders

Latin Americans and speakers of Spanish and Portuguese

All migrants

CEE predominantly, we have a key focus on the Roma community

Elderly

No/low level English

Local Authority care

Eastern Europeans: most clients are Polish or Romanian

Victims of domestic abuse

BAME

Those in contact with criminal justice system

Low income

Third country nationals

Young people in care

If you do not provide direct support/ advice how do you support EU citizens?

Policy and advocacy

Advice and referrals to partners

Strategic work

Signposting and awareness raising

Wider support to EU communities

What new cases are you dealing with?

Pre-settled to Settled Status

Repeat applications

Childrens status

Managing a status

Joining Family Members

Retained rights

Late applications

Issues at the border

Durable partners

What are you seeing on the ground?

No evidence of residence for vulnerable individuals.

Care needs for family members in the UK and in home country.

Gathering evidence from EU countries and in the UK for applications.

Increasing demands of evidence accepted by the Home Office for applications.

Gathering evidence on criminal convictions via UK agencies.

Admin reviews delays and evidence gathering.

Evidence gathering for retained rights, durable partnerships and joining family members.

Mental health needs of clients.

Ineligible applications.

Disparaity in treatment of Roma citizens and finding enough evidence for AR’s.

Clients who are particularly vulnerable and digitally excluded.

Children’s applications not made.

How will the new round of Home Office funding to organisations directly affect your organisation? eg you are applying, you work closely with a GFO, not sure where you will refer cases in the future?

We are overwhelmed with referrals from other organizations.

We will focus on complex OISC 2+ cases and deal with L1 applications where they are internal referrals from users with multiple vulnerabilities and in urgent need. We will reduce PAS work.

Will have to review signposting pathways.

It will not affect our work as we are not funded by the HO.

Not sure where we will refer cases in the future.

We are receiving more requests for referrals as other complex case advice orgs have fallen away. We lost a sixth of our HO funding this round so our capacity is seriously impacted. Unclear what we do with cases that come in that could technically be resolved at OISC level 1 (but may be linked to a family member who’s case needs resolving at level 2).

Are there any trends or complex issues you are seeing that you want to highlight?

Durable relationships: need to prove 4+ years, lack of evidence means refusal.

Admin refusals.

Unfair treatment of Roma women – not having access to evidence.

Increase in applications from long residents with historic Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) cases where the Home Office can’t find records of the ILR in their systems and ask for alternative evidence of residence for 5 continuous years.

Applications from young mothers with children when Social Services are involved in care proceedings due to lack of status and extreme impoverishment.

EUSS Family Permit refusals because of evidence submitted.

Digital status access issues.

Home Office enhanced scrutiny, eg in requiring past passports and more evidence of residence, and requiring photos of each document – last one took 5 hrs to photo and upload to Home Office copious evidence of residence (additional to time spent on the original late application for a non-literate Roma living and working in UK some 20 years, but with limited NINO recorded evidence) – all non-funded. In non-criminal cases, with no basis for suspicion, and reasonable prima facie evidence of qualifying residence, this blinkered enhanced scrutiny and consequential effort is disproportionate.

Long gaps breaking continuity of residence resulting in evidential difficulties to obtain status.

Reverse dependency cases where an EEA Family Member wants to apply for EUSS to care for a dependent EEA relative with a status.

The main issue is the ever increasing problems we are facing with rejection of evidence by the Home Office on frivolous grounds (or, more precisely, no grounds at all). Applicants for Settled Status who do not have five years’ continuous employment are finding it increasingly difficult to prove their residence. We have seen a trend of rejections of evidence (such as tenancy agreements and bank statements issued by online banks) which were routinely accepted a year ago. This has echoes of Windrush and amounts to direct discrimination against applicants who arrived in the UK relatively recently and have yet to apply for settled status. Our service users rarely have utilities bills or Council Tax bills in their names.

In non-criminal cases, with no basis for suspicion, and reasonable prima facie evidence of qualifying residence, this blinkered enhanced scrutiny and consequential effort is disproportionate.

Increasing numbers of overstayers.

Impact of police and court systems not being updated with changes that then delay a client’s application.

Siblings needing care and reversed dependency care need.

Reduced range of evidence that is accepted by HO caseworkers (e.g. NHS evidence not considered, at least on its own).

Hostels requiring evidence of eligibility for benefits before offering a bed to someone who has completed a custodial sentence or has been granted bail.

Bad communication by Home Office: refusal letters for PSS to SS applications give the impression that the applicant’s PSS is no longer effective and that the applicant should leave the country.

What issues are you focused on this month?

Mapping support organisations and engagement.

On top of case work we are trying to bring fraudulent EUSS services to the OISC enforcement attention.

eVisas.

Resolve outstanding cases.

Deportations and extraditions are complex areas of work.

Reporting on unhelpful and opaque decision-making by the Home Office.

Lobbying funders about the need for additional EUSS funding to not lose a specialised sub-sector of the immigration sector.

Involvement in strategic litigation.

Lobbying for changes to the Home Office grant scheme.

Building localised strategic partnerships with other third sector partners and the local authority. Building relations with RSLs so we can offer accommodation to our clients in our operating areas. Developing third and voluntary sector networks to identify national trends and needs for us to respond to.

We regularly see clients whose applications have been dealt with by unlicensed immigration advisers, often creating problems that were not there in the first place. We are thinking about ways of trying to protect the community from these advisers.

Advocacy to minimise negative impacts of EUSS policy changes.

Post election policy.

If you are not involved in case work what are you planning for next month?

Working on resources to raise awareness about changes to the Scheme.

Advocacy and information provision.

Engaging with new Government ministers and Home Office.

Building caseworker capacity – in some operating areas we only have one worker or PT staff which has impacted capacity and prevented us from doing more strategic work locally.

Community engagement and events organising.

Collecting evidence on eVisa rollout.

What were the most common reasons used by your clients for making a late application?

Lack of English; not coping with complex administrative burden (incl. lack of evidence or advice); historic residence.

Limited English and IT skills, lack of understanding of the process and receiving incorrect advice (either from family/friends or unregulated advisors.

Not having information in native language, not being aware that children need to have their own status, lack of digital skills and no English to be able to make an application.

Lack of awareness they had to apply, being confused by having a PR BRC issued under EEA rules, having previous application refused.

Legacy ILR holders not aware they need to/can apply for EUSS.

List the most common reasons stated by the Home Office you’ve seen for applications being refused at this assessment stage?

Lack of evidence, not being able to contact the person who did the application as they have no digital skills.

Should have challenged previous refusal and not sufficient reason for delay.

Not vulnerable enough.

NHS evidence cannot be verified.

Not accepting compassionate grounds as reasonable i.e. extended periods of homelessness and rough sleeping not considered a compelling reason.

Has your casework or ability to work been impacted by changes to the Home Office’s grants scheme to organisations (GFOs)?

Less resources, project/support disruption.

Less options for Level 2 casework.

Yes, we are seeking funding elsewhere and are paying for work from charity reserves.

Since the HO funding expired, we have had to charge for EUSS work which was previously free of charge.