Designing Digital ID so it Works for People Experiencing Homelessness is Key to Ensuring it Works for Everyone

The Westminster Government has announced plans to introduce a free and voluntary digital ID - and is asking the public, experts and organisations what they should consider when developing these plans. Often, people facing homelessness face additional barriers and challenges that need to be part of this conversation.  

The people we support have told us how they have been repeatedly turned away from services, required to navigate a maze of confusing systems before they can access help and even asked to prove that they are homeless. We have heard the trauma of this experience described as worse than the experience of homelessness itself.  

ID and documentation are a common barrier. Every service asks for something different, but holding onto physical papers can be incredibly difficult when you don’t have a safe and stable home and are forced to move between unsuitable temporary accommodation or sleep on the streets where sadly possessions regularly get lost or stolen.   

So a voluntary, free to use digital ID could make it easier to access public services designed to help people, right? We spoke to our frontline staff, members and our Policy and Campaigns Lived Experience Panel to find out if this is really the case. And whilst these potential benefits could be true, we heard some serious concerns that they could be outweighed by the risks.  

Because people facing homelessness often do not have traditional forms of ID, the process of verification to access the digital ID in the first place could be challenging. Smart phones, where the digital ID will be stored, are expensive, difficult to charge and targets for theft so access would be unreliable. We could even see an increase in theft or exploitation amongst vulnerable people through smart phones with digital ID. And for some groups, like people fleeing domestic abuse, these security risks could be life threatening.  

Many of the people we support have been let down by multiple services. People may have been criminalised under the archaic Vagrancy Act of 1824, simply for having no place to go. So trust in services is understandably low.   

We heard suspicion of intentions behind the digital ID, concerns around tracking and sharing data without consent. That kind of perception matters, as it can make people less likely to engage with services.   

It’s right that digital ID will be voluntary and other ways of accessing public services will still be available. But we’re worried this might lead to what is essentially a two-tier system – where accessing public services becomes easier for people who have digital ID and more difficult for those who don’t, further excluding the people we support. 

Digital ID could become the default option and in practice be needed to access services. We see this already when people experiencing homelessness find it difficult to register with a GP because they are told they need to provide ID or proof of address. This is despite guidance making clear that this is not grounds to refuse patient registration.  

Crisis was invited to share the experiences of our members with the People’s Panels on Digital ID – an independent group made up of members of the public brought together to discuss and debate the proposal, consider different perspectives and trade-offs and work together to make recommendations to Government.  

Given what we’ve heard around the different opportunities and challenges the digital ID could present, this open and transparent approach is very welcome. And it’s great that they have spoken to people experiencing homelessness directly. 

We’ll be advising Government on ways to make the system more inclusive – like providing free face to face support, boosting access to smartphones or using the cost savings from digital ID to invest in tailored community-based services.  

If the digital ID system is designed in a way that works for people who face multiple exclusions and barriers, like people experiencing homelessness, it will meet the needs of everyone. That’s why the experiences of people we support must be front and centre.