External Evaluation of the Refugee Integration ... - Islington Council

www.islington.gov.uk 

Towards One Islington 

External evaluation of Islington’s 

Refugee Integration Strategy 

education education educatio 

community safety community 

ousing housing housing housi 

mployment employment emp 

ommunity integration commu 

ealth health health health hea


External evaluation of Islington’s Refugee Integration Strategy 

Content of External Evaluation 

1. Introduction.......................................................................................3 

2. Methodology .....................................................................................6 

3. Perspectives on the strategy ...........................................................8 

4. The six key areas of integration.....................................................14 

5. Discussion.......................................................................................29 

6. Conclusion ......................................................................................35 

6. Recommendations..........................................................................36



Acknowledgements 

We would like to express our thanks to all 

those people who willingly gave their time to 

us and who contributed to this evaluation. 

Without exception, those who answered 

questions, provided their views or 

participated in other ways did so with 

patience, good humour and insight. 

We would particularly like to thank all of the 

organisations, both statutory and voluntary 

sector, that made it possible for us to talk to 

such a broad range of refugee communities 

during the course of this evaluation. These 

include key personnel from Islington 

Council, Islington Primary Care Trust (PCT), 

Islington Refugee Integration Service, the 

Arab Advice Bureau, Children’s Active 

Involvement Service (CAIS), CARILA Latin 

American Welfare Group, CEA - Ethnic 

Minority Achievement Service, City & 

Islington College, Congolese Community 

Council, Copenhagen St Parish Church, 

Day-Mer Turkish & Kurdish Community 

Centre, Factory Project, Finsbury Park 

Homeless Families’ Project, Iranian & 

Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation 

(IKWRO), IMECE Turkish Speaking 

Women’s Group, Iranian Community 

Centre, Islington Community Safety 

Partnerships Unit, Islington Refugee Forum, 

Islington Safeguarding Children’s Board, 

Islington Somali Community, Latin 

American Women’s Rights Service 

(LAWRS), Light Project International, St 

Mary Magdalene Centre for Asylum 

Seekers, St Mellitus, St Pancras Refugee 

Centre, Refugee Therapy Centre, 

Shaftesbury Leaving Care Team, 

Zimbabwe Association. 

Finally we would like to say thank you to 

Islington Refugee Integration Service for 

their time and for the provision of the 

invaluable resource of the Refugee 

Services Directory, without which, making 

contact with many of the above 

organisations would have been significantly 

more laborious and time consuming. 

CSET in the Department of Educational Research, Lancaster University, LA1 4YD 

The CSET Team: 

Professor Murray Saunders, Linda Pearce, Paul Davies, 

Liz Saunders and Abby Spencer 

Edited by Kim Ward 

2



1. Introduction 

1.1 Objectives 

This is the final report of the evaluation of 

the Islington Refugee Integration Strategy, 

which was initiated in March 2007 and 

carried out over a year-long period. The 

main objectives of this ‘formative 

evaluation’ 1 can be summarised as follows: 

1.2 Audience and Focus 

In the first instance the audience for this 

report is the Refugee Strategic Planning 

Board (RSPB) and the Islington Refugee 

Integration Service (IRIS), but the 

expectation is that other audience s will 

include: 

 

 

 

to assess the effectiveness of the 

Integration Strategy 2 from the 

perspectives of key stakeholders 

to create an evaluation design that is 

responsive and flexible so that any 

unintended outcomes of the strategy 

and unanticipated issues can be 

identified 

to identify how the implementation of the 

strategy can be improved 

 

 

 

Voluntary sector and refugee 

community organisations 

Statutory partners in the local authority 

and the Primary Care Trust (PCT) 3 , 

Homes for Islington 4 etc 

Regional and national representatives 

with an interest in refugee integration 

and community cohesion 

 

to highlight gaps in the provision of 

services focusing on refugee integration 

and identify areas in need of 

development 

This report is intended to be an indicative, 

rather than definitive, account of the 

experiences of key stakeholders in relation 

to the Islington Refugee Integration 

Strategy and refugee integration more 

broadly. 

1 Formative evaluation is conducted during the lifetime of a project or ‘intervention’ (in this case the Refugee Integration Strategy). The 

results of a formative evaluation can be used to inform future decisions about the direction of work and the allocation of resources. A 

‘summative evaluation’ is conducted at the conclusion of a project. 

2 Also referred to as ‘the strategy’. 

3 

In December 2008 there was a name change from ‘Islington PCT’ to ‘NHS Islington’. 

4 

‘Homes for Islington’ is the Arms Length Management Organisation (ALMO) that manages Islington Council's rented and leasehold 

homes. 

3



1.3 Structure 

The report is divided into six sections. The 

remainder of the first section provides some 

background information on the strategy and 

associated action plans and also outlines 

the national, regional and local policy 

context. The second section describes the 

methodology used for the research. Section 

3 contains general findings on the impact 

and outcomes of the strategy. These have 

been obtained from interviews with 

members of IRIS, the RSPB and statutory 

and voluntary organisations that work in 

partnership with IRIS. Section 4 presents 

the findings from interviews with refugees 

and asylum seekers and is broken down 

into the six areas of integration identified by 

the action plans. Section 5 identifies and 

discusses the main themes arising from the 

evaluation and section 6 sets out some 

concluding remarks. The report finishes 

with a list of recommendations for further 

action. 

1.4 Background 

The Islington Refugee Integration Strategy 5 

was drafted in response to the ‘Best Value 

Review’ of the services provided by 

Islington Council to refugees and asylum 

seekers. The review was carried out in 

2004 and the Integration Strategy was 

published at the beginning of 2006. 

Six action plans were also developed on 

different areas of integration in order to help 

translate the strategy into practice. The 

themes of community integration, 

community safety, education, employment, 

health and housing were identified after 

consultation with key stakeholders and the 

local community. The action plans are 

intended to be read in conjunction with the 

strategy. They are ‘living documents’, which 

are updated as projects and initiatives 

develop over time. 6 

The strategy was drafted by Islington 

Refugee Integration Service (IRIS) which is 

a small, council-based team, whose overall 

remit is to ensure that refugee integration is 

improved and promoted in the borough. By 

'integration', IRIS means the process that 

takes place when refugees are empowered 

to achieve their full potential, enabled to 

contribute fully, and to exercise rights and 

responsibilities that they share with other 

residents. 7 

For the purposes of the strategy refugees 

are defined as persons who are in the 

asylum process, or who have been granted 

refugee status or leave to remain after 

claiming asylum. The strategy refers to 

people who live, work or who are in 

education in the borough. 

In order to fulfil its overall remit IRIS has 

adopted a number of approaches. The 

service maintains an overview of both 

statutory and voluntary sector work on 

refugee integration in the borough so that 

partnership work can be encouraged and 

any gaps in services identified. IRIS also 

supports the work of service providers and 

tries to improve the accessibility of 

mainstream services for refugees. At a 

strategic level, IRIS works towards the 

inclusion of refugee needs in wider council 

strategies and planning on issues such as 

housing, health, employment and 

education. 

The Refugee Strategic Partnership Board 

(RSPB) was established in order to provide 

a forum where IRIS can report on its 

integration activities and seek strategic 

guidance on its work. The board is made up 

of representatives from the council, its 

statutory partners and the voluntary sector. 

5 

See the separate online document for a copy of the Integration Strategy. 

6 

See the separate online documents for action plans. 

7 

London Borough of Islington (2006) Islington Refugee Integration Strategy 2005-2008, London Borough of Islington: London. 

4



1.5 Context 

The context within which Islington has 

developed its Refugee Integration Strategy 

has been, and remains, both a complex and 

changing one. On one level the strategy 

has to engage with local need across the 

six key areas, 8 each with its own policy 

context and history. However, it is also 

informed by regional (pan-London), national 

and international integration policies and 

initiatives. 

Local Context 

A range of council policies, strategies and 

plans contextualise and inform the refugee 

strategy. An important example is the ‘One 

Islington’ vision 2005-2008; a strategy 

which underlines the priorities of the council 

and which has been a key driver of services 

within the borough. The refugee strategy 

engages with the ‘One Islington’ vision by 

addressing two of its key priorities: (i) 

improving the life chances of vulnerable 

residents and; (ii) working with, and 

responding, to the needs of people who are 

‘hard to reach’. 

Other relevant policies have developed 

since the drafting of the refugee integration 

strategy and these have informed the work 

of IRIS, which is responsible for putting the 

strategy into practice. One example is the 

ten-year ‘Sustainable Community Strategy’, 

which was agreed upon in October 2007. 

This details the council’s commitment to 

responding to the needs of vulnerable 

individuals. Another example is the 

Corporate Equality Scheme and Community 

Cohesion Strategy that runs from 2008 to 

2011 and seeks to promote equality of 

opportunity for all residents, service users 

and employees. Work around the refugee 

strategy has also influenced the 

identification of refugees as a key priority 

group in Islington’s Local Area Agreement. 9 

Regional Context 

The responsibility for the strategic 

leadership of refugee integration in London 

was transferred from central government to 

the Mayor of London in April 2006. The 

Board for Refugee Integration in London 

(BRIL) was convened in July 2006 and 

consisted of key stakeholders and partners 

that advised on the development of a 

refugee integration strategy for the capital. 

The draft version of this strategy, ‘London 

Enriched’, was launched in February 2008. 

Islington’s Refugee Integration Strategy 

informed part of this pan-London strategy. 

As of March 2009 the final strategy has not 

been published. BRIL has been superseded 

by the creation of the London Strategic 

Migration Partnership (LSMP) which will 

lead and coordinate work in London to 

promote the integration of migrants, 

including refugees. 

National Context 

At a national level refugee integration policy 

has been a fast-evolving field with a number 

of strategies and developments. In 2004 the 

Home Office launched a consultation paper 

entitled ‘Integration Matters: A National 

Strategy for Refugee Integration’. This led 

to the publication of a ‘Five Year Plan on 

Immigration and Asylum’ in February 2005. 

By 2006 the government announced that it 

was overhauling the way in which refugee 

integration services are structured and 

funded in England and carried out another 

consultation which resulted in the creation 

of the new Refugee Integration and 

Employment Service (RIES). 10 

As the title suggests, this service focuses 

particularly on employment as a key driver 

to successful integration outcomes but also 

provides practical advice on housing, 

education and English language. Refugees 

are offered a standard twelve- 

8 

The key areas are community integration, community safety, education, employment, health and housing. 

9 

Local Area Agreements are between central government and councils. They outline a set of agreed outcomes and targets over a three to 

five year period. 

10 Home Office (2006) A New Model for National Integration Services in England. Consultation Paper, Home Office: London. 

5



month package which includes the 

development of a personal integration 

programme. The service is being delivered 

on a regional basis through contracts with a 

number of providers. The government is 

currently due to release a new refugee 

integration and resettlement strategy. 

EU Context 

The development of a European framework 

on integration is ongoing and refers to all 

non-EU migrants, not just refugees. An 

important milestone in this process was the 

adoption of a set of ‘Common Basic 

Principles on Integration’ by the Justice and 

Home Affairs Council in November 2004. 

The 11 principles outline the priorities that 

national integration policies need to 

address on areas such as employment, 

education, access to services, language 

and culture. In 2005 the European 

Commission published a Communication 

on ‘A Common Agenda for Integration’, 

which makes proposals for concrete 

measures to put the CBPs into practice. It 

is however important to note that refugees 

are excluded from some EU integration 

policies; the ‘Long Term Residence 

Directive’ 11 for example. 

2. Methodology 

The research process was broken down 

into two phases. The first phase included 

semi-structured interviews with individuals 

involved in the development, 

implementation and delivery of the strategy 

in Islington. Representatives from the 

Islington Refugee Integration Service 

(IRIS), the Refugee Strategic Planning 

Board (RSPB) and a range of partner 

voluntary and statutory organisations (that 

provide services to refugees), were all 

interviewed. The researchers explored how 

the interviewees felt that the strategy was 

working on the ground, its strengths and 

weaknesses and how they felt that the 

strategy could be improved. 12 A total of 38 

interviews were conducted. Evidence from 

a further 44 service providers and 

stakeholders was obtained through the 

observation of relevant events. 13 

The Centre for the Study of Education and 

Training (CSET) [the research team], 

understand evaluation to be part of 

participating in a ‘democratic process’. In 

other words, it is important to give 

individuals and groups, who are the targets 

of public policy, the opportunity to describe 

if, and how, they are impacted by such 

policies. Consultation with refugees and 

asylum seekers themselves was therefore 

vital and made up the second phase of the 

evaluation. A total of 95 refugees and 

asylum seekers were interviewed or 

consulted directly through focus groups, 

semi-structured group interviews, individual 

interviews, shadowing of case workers, 

informal café and restaurant interviews and 

questionnaires. 

11 

On 25 November 2003, the Council agreed on a directive which enables third-country nationals, (who have legally resided for five 

years in the territory of a Member Sate), to enjoy a legal status comparable to that of citizens. The UK has opted-out of this measure. 

12 The interview schedules can be found in Appendix 1. 

13 

For details of the sample refer to Appendix 2. 

6



A further 72 refugees, asylum seekers and Where relevant, participants were 

of key informants in evaluation method. 16 area. 

migrants 14 contributed evidence indirectly questioned about their knowledge and 

through their participation in relevant events experience of IRIS’s work (such as the 

observed by the research team. The online Refugee Services Directory). 17 

sample includes a wide range of However, it was felt that most of the 

nationalities. 15 

refugees and asylum seekers interviewed 

were unlikely to be aware of the strategy, 

The researchers concentrated on eliciting especially the interface between strategic 

evidence from refugees and asylum priorities and service provision or other 

seekers on the areas of integration, outcomes. As a result, the researchers 

community safety, employment, health, focused on achieving a good understanding 

housing and education. Experiences of of the experiences and priorities of refugees 

services such as victim support, and asylum seekers with regards to 

employment training and housing advice 

were explored. In addition, participants 

integration. These insights can be used to 

identify any gaps in the current provision of 

were questioned about access to integration services in the borough and to 

healthcare, educational and employment inform the future development and 

opportunities and experiences of housing in implementation of the strategy. 

the borough. Suggestions for improvements 

were also discussed. What are known as 

‘soft indicators’ of integration, which are 

The evaluators emphasised ethical practice 

during the research process by ensuring 

more difficult to measure, were also that interviews were carried out in 

considered. Examples of these soft appropriate and secure environments. All 

indicators are the perceived ‘tone’ of information disclosed by interviewees 

neighbourhoods, friendship groups and remains confidential and efforts have been 

networks and the contributions that made to ensure that quotes are not 

individuals and groups make to community 

life. The use of café surveys played an 

important role in exploring soft indicators of 

integration. This involved members of the 

evaluation team visiting local cafes in 

attributable. It was ethically inappropriate to 

ask individuals to disclose information of a 

highly sensitive nature relating to issues 

around domestic violence. However, to 

ensure that this important issue was 

Islington and engaging café owners and considered during the evaluation the 

workers in a conversation about living in 

Islington. These individuals have the status 

researchers relied on evidence from service 

providers with professional expertise in this 

14 

Although the strategy refers to individuals who are either in the asylum process, or who have been awarded refugee status or leave to 

remain, it is often hard or inappropriate to make these distinctions during an interview. As a result, a small proportion of the people 

consulted would technically be described as migrants rather than refugees. However, there are often overlaps between the issues faced 

by refugees and other migrants and so their perspectives have been included in the report. 

15 

For details of the sample refer to Appendix 2. 

16 

Knight, P and Saunders, M. (1999) ‘Understanding Teachers' Professional Cultures Through Interview: A Constructivist Approach’, 

Evaluation and Research in Education, Vol 13(3) pp144-157. 

17 

The Refugee Service Directory includes information about rights and services for refugee and asylum seekers within the borough. 

7



3. Perspectives on the strategy 

The following evidence was obtained from 

interviews with statutory and voluntary 

organisations that work in partnership with 


(IRIS), (some of whom provide services to 

refugees and asylum seekers in Islington). 

Members of the Refugee Strategic 

Planning Board (RSPB) and the IRIS team 

were also interviewed. The focus of this 

section is the overall impact of the strategy 

and associated action plans. 

3.1 Awareness and engagement 

Overall, it was observed that the strategy is 

dynamic and helps to create a clear vision 

of refugee integration for the borough. The 

following quotes from board members 

show that the strategy was seen to provide 

a mechanism for coordination and focus. 

“It has provided a strategic basis for 

planning services” (RSPB board member) 

“It has contributed to securing shared 

ownership across services…much better 

coordinated and RSPB feels like a team” 

(RSPB board member) 

The strategy has been used to organise a 

wide partnership of statutory, voluntary and 

community organisations around a 

common goal and purpose. This 

networking approach has had a galvanising 

effect and concentrated activities in key 

areas of refugee integration. 

Bringing people together and sharing 

resources is a cost effective way of 

improving refugee integration in the 

borough. Some organisations have used 

the strategy and action plans as a basis for 

developing priorities or have integrated the 

strategy and plans into their own approach. 

These outcomes mean that the strategy 

has ‘added value’ to the development of 

key priorities both within the council and 

partner organisations or services by 

coordinating efforts. 

Despite these overall achievements it is 

important to note that not all interviewees 

had a clear understanding of the strategy 

itself and some found it difficult to answer 

questions such as “what has the strategy 

done for you?” This may be because the 

work of the IRIS team, and the effects of 

the strategy as a whole, are embedded in 

day-to-day practices. It is also likely to be 

because of the difficulty of attributing 

practical outcomes and impacts to strategic 

initiatives or particular policies. 

Ownership and understanding of the 

strategy, and its implications, were strong 

at a senior management level across both 

the council and voluntary and community 

sector organisations. The fact that the 

strategy was developed after a thorough 

consultation process was identified as an 

important reason for its support. 

8



If an interviewee has a leadership or 

coordinating role they are more likely to be 

aware of the overall implications of the 

strategy and make connections of a broader 

kind. However, for interviewees with less 

strategic roles, the point of contact with the 

strategy is via the IRIS team and its 

activities, such as the development of the 

Refugee Services Directory, facilitation of 

the Islington Refugee Forum and Refugee 

Week celebrations, to name some 

examples. 

It was noted that information relating to the 

strategy and its associated action plans, is 

not always effectively cascaded down to the 

delivery level. This was reported to be due, 

in part, to the limited attention that some 

senior managers pay to the strategy 

because of the competing demands on their 

time and resources. 

“I have not attended meetings for 

dissemination…I had a role in the 

development through a focus group…A 

plan with no funding attached does not take 

priority.” (Strategic partner, statutory 

provider) 

In general, where the strategy has been 

understood, it enjoys positive support. The 

commitment shown by Islington Council to 

refugees is seen as a benefit to many 

projects and activities: 

“IRIS show commitment when other areas 

have shut-down projects or asylum teams” 

(Community and voluntary organisation) 

A positive and unintended outcome of the 

strategy has been an improved profile for 

some of the voluntary and community 

organisations involved in the development 

and implementation of the strategy. 

Some service providers felt that IRIS needs 

to concentrate more on communicating 

the broad aims of the strategy to partners 

and on demonstrating how the strategy 

translates into practical initiatives. 

“We know what the IRIS agenda is – to 

make refugee issues mainstream across 

the council – but what exactly does this 

mean? – what are the activities? E.g. to 

have one refugee expert in each children 

centre…Or creating opportunities where 

people from different communities can meet 

each other including non-refugee 

communities.” (Quote from Children’s 

Services Meeting). 

Another factor which has restricted the 

engagement of community organisations 

with the strategy are the limited time and 

financial resources at their disposal. These 

limitations can also impact on the 

willingness of organisations to engage in 

consultation, especially when they cannot 

see any immediate and tangible benefits or 

outcomes. 

3.2 Funding 

The main focus of the strategy has been to 

ensure that the needs of refugees are met 

by mainstream services. IRIS has also 

worked in partnership with statutory and 

voluntary sector partners on various 

projects in order to promote integration in 

Islington. There is not, however, any 

funding attached to the strategy. Some 

providers from the community and voluntary 

sector, which is characterised by front-line 

work and limited resources, have found the 

lack of funding rather limiting. 

“Doesn’t need to be new but there needs to 

be an improvement or shift in using existing 

resources” (Community or voluntary 

organisation) 

9



3.3 IRIS 

The following quotes from the IRIS team 

suggest that, for them, the existence of the 

strategy has been a means to galvanise 

action on refugee integration across the 

borough. 

“Impact: having the strategy embedded at 

a high level in other strategies helps unlock 

funding” (IRIS team member) 

“A powerful tool to use and to share with 

others to deliver overarching aims” (IRIS 

team member) 

However, there was a strong view that the 

strategy could be more responsive and 

have the capacity to evolve as 

circumstances change (both on the ground 

and politically). 

“Strategies outdate very quickly, things 

move on and they can become a 

redundant bit of paper” (IRIS team 

member) 

“We need to manage processes of 

change” (IRIS team member) 

The IRIS team were seen as ‘the human 

face of the strategy’ and regarded as 

positive, ‘action-orientated’ and 

approachable. The identification of gaps in 

services relating to refugee integration was 

seen as an important part of IRIS’s work. 

“A good approachable team who are 

positive and on side. They are competent 

and give quick responses.” (Strategic 

partner, statutory provider) 

“IRIS is very advanced in this field – good 

model in informing and involving refugees 

– leading model of good practice e.g. 

Home Office refers to it.” (RSPB board 

member) 

The evidence suggests that some providers 

have understood the IRIS team to be a 

lobbying group with a particular brief to 

advocate for the ‘refugee voice’. The 

legitimacy of this perceived role was 

questioned as it was not seen as feasible to 

promote the needs of one group above 

other interest groups. However, members of 

the IRIS team did not see themselves as 

lobbyists and instead understood their role 

to involve ensuring that refugee issues are 

incorporated into mainstream initiatives 

alongside the issues of other groups. There 

is therefore room for clarification of IRIS’s 

role with key partners. 

3.4 Action plans 

The six action plans were drafted in 

conjunction with the strategy and with the 

intention of translating policy into practice 

across the different priority areas. 18 Each 

action plan has a number of priorities which 

were identified as a result of consultation 

with stakeholders and the community. 

These priorities are then broken down into 

specific actions and outcomes. The plans 

not only include work to be carried out by 

IRIS but also that of other departments and 

organisations working on issues relating to 

refugee integration. 19 

The level of engagement from all 

stakeholders with the action plans has not 

been consistent across the six priority 

areas. For example, there has been more 

partnership work and progression in the 

area of education than there has on 

employment. There was also little evidence 

from service providers and community 

organisations of a broad knowledge across 

all areas of integration as interviewees 

have tended to focus on their own 

particular issue. It was suggested by some 

interviewees that more regular review and 

contact with partners in order to track, 

share and exchange experiences would be 

useful. 

18 

The key areas are community integration, community safety, education, employment, health and housing. 

19 

For more detail please refer to the separate online documents for the action plans and section 4 of the report for a presentation of findings 

on work carried out in the six different areas. 

10



The action plans have been monitored and 

updated on a regular basis by the IRIS 

team to gauge progress towards desired 

outcomes. The intention of this evaluation 

is to enhance this monitoring process by 

ensuring that the perspectives of refugee 

communities are heard and included. The 

findings of interviews with refugees and 

asylum seekers can be found in section 4. 

3.5 Key achievements 

A number of outputs have been identified 

resulting from IRIS’ work around the 

strategy and action plans. The team has 

contributed to local, regional and national 

consultations. Examples include Islington’s 

Sustainable Communities Strategy and the 

Mayor’s ‘Draft Strategy for Refugee 

Integration in London’. 20 In the area of 

community integration the development of 

the Refugee Services Directory, which 

provides a central point of information for 

refugees and service providers, has been 

key. A by-product of work on this directory 

is that IRIS can monitor the overall 

provision of services in the borough and 

identify where there are gaps or duplication 

in work. 

In 2005 IRIS commissioned a piece of 

research that estimates the numbers and 

types of refugees living in Islington. The 

research also looks at refugee perceptions 

of their inclusion in society and the key 

factors that facilitate that process. The 

findings from this research have been used 

by both voluntary organisations, such as 

Age Concern, 21 and council departments, 

such as Children’s Services and Housing, 

in order to inform their research, policies 

and services. 22 

Another example of IRIS’ work around 

community integration is the involvement 

of the service in Refugee Week events. 

These events bring together members of 

Refugee Community Organisations 

(RCOs), the general public and 

representatives from other community 

organisations. They also give profile to the 

council’s commitment to refugee 

integration. IRIS has also collaborated on a 

visual media project with the organisation 

‘All Change’. This project gave refugee 

women in Islington the opportunity to tell 

their personal stories of settlement in the 

UK. 

IRIS supported the development of the 

Islington Refugee Forum when it was first 

established and has also helped to 

develop the leadership capacity of a 

number of targeted refugee community 

groups. Support has been provided around 

the development of business plans, 

funding applications and stronger 

partnerships within and between the 

voluntary and community sector. 

In early 2008 IRIS began a six month pilot 

of a signposting and referral service. This 

operated twice a month from the Islington 

Law Centre and St Mary Magdalene Centre 

for Refugees and Asylum Seekers. The 

aim of the pilot was to obtain better 

knowledge about the issues with which 

refugees and asylum seekers need 

assistance and to identify any gaps in 

current service provision. IRIS also 

coordinated the ‘Transitions project’ which 

delivered sessions on women’s rights, 

conflict resolution, male identity and sexual 

health for young refugee and asylumseeking 

men in schools. 23 

20 Mayor of London (2007) London Enriched. The Mayor’s Draft Strategy for Refugee Integration in London, Greater London Authority: 

London. 

21 

Fletcher, E (2007) “I never beg me bread yet.” Review of Access to Benefits in Islington for Older People from BME groups, Age Concern: 

London. www.acislington.org.uk/pdf/Benefits_Review_2007.pdf 

22 

Kofman, E and Lukes, S (2006) Mapping Research on Refugees in the Borough of Islington, London Borough of Islington: London. 

http://www.islington.gov.uk/Health/ServicesForAdults/iris_new/refugeemapping.asp 

23 

The project was a partnership between IRIS, Cambridge Education Authority and the PCT. It was delivered by the organisation ‘Working 

With Men’: http://www.workingwithmen.org/ 

11



In order to address some of the priorities Other achievements include the 

in 2008. 26 

around community safety, IRIS has worked 

on the inclusion of the specific needs of 

refugees in the council’s Domestic Violence 

development of a council wide strategy for 

family learning that specifically references 

the needs of refugees, the simplification of 

Strategy and the Preventing Violent the library joining process (which has 

Extremism action plan. IRIS has also resulted in an increase in library 

supported exploratory work that is being 

conducted by the Women’s Design Service 

membership by refugees), consultation with 

refugee parents as part of the overall 

on community safety issues for women in development of Islington’s Parenting 

the Finsbury Park area. 

Strategy and the strengthening of links 

between refugees and children’s centres 

There have been fewer achievements in the 

area of employment. However, there is 

through the engagement of RCOs. Through 

the EASI Development Partnership, and 

evidence of some strategic engagement with St Mary Magdalene Centre for 

from the council with the employment action 

plan and initial work has been carried out 

on trying to increase the number of 

employment training places for refugees. 

Refugees and Asylum Seekers, IRIS has 

facilitated the development of an ESOL 

project using drama to develop the English 

skills of asylum seekers. 

IRIS was also a partner in the Empowering 

Asylum Seekers to Integrate (EASI) In the area of Health IRIS has worked to 

project 24 which was managed by Islington develop ties with the PCT and also ensured 

Training Network (ITN) and ran until the end 

of 2007. 

that the perspectives of refugees have been 

included in the PCT’s Race Equality Plan 

(2008-2001). The team has also managed 

In conjunction with the EASI and PRESTO 25 information and consultation days for 

partnerships, a conference was hosted by 

IRIS during Refugee Week 2007 so that key 

learning from the initiatives could be 

disseminated. 

refugee adult and young carers. Findings 

from these events have been used to inform 

the relevant council strategies. 27 IRIS’ work 

around mental health has included ongoing 

support for the Refugee Crisis Intervention 

One of IRIS’s key achievements in the field 

of education has been to encourage a 

cross-sector approach to refugee issues. 

Service; a project that provides early 

intervention on mental health issues in a 

community setting. 

This has involved bringing together a 

diverse range of partners and promoting 

joint-working. An example of such work is 

the coordination of an adult education 

response to the DIUS consultation on ESOL 

(English for Speakers of Other Languages) 

As with Employment, achievements in the 

field of Housing have been less far-reaching 

than other areas. Nevertheless, IRIS has 

provided input into the council’s housing 

strategy and there are good links between 

24 

The main aim of the EASI initiative was to improve the skills of asylum seekers in preparation for employment. In order to achieve this, a number 

of projects were set up that focused on English language training, capacity building for RCOs, as well as volunteering, orientation and preparation 

for the labour market. IRIS’ role was to ensure that any outputs from the projects, such as key learning, good practice etc, were fed into 

mainstream services and strategies. 

25 

PRESTO (Partnership for Refugee Employment through Support, Training and Online learning) was established to develop, test and 

disseminate a range of innovative training 

and employment packages for refugee professionals and provide empowerment models as a response to the identified patterns of discrimination 

and inequality that highly qualified and skilled refugees face in the labour market. 

26 Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (2008) Focusing English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) on Community Cohesion, 

DIUS: London. 

27 

Islington’s Strategy for Carers 2007-2010 and Islington Young Carers Strategy 2008-2011. 

12



3.6 Key gaps 

Despite the achievements detailed above 

there are some key areas that need to be 

developed in order to meet the original 

objectives outlined in the six action plans. In 

the area of community integration most of 

the objectives in the action plan have been 

met; either through the work of IRIS or other 

key partners working in the field. However, 

there appears to have been little work done 

on ensuring that strategic commitments of 

various departments across the council are 

actually put into practice. The above section 

shows that IRIS has done well at ensuring 

that refugee issues have been given 

consideration in a range of strategies and 

action plans. Nevertheless, this is only a 

first step and more needs to be done to 

ensure that these strategic commitments 

actually translate into changed practice on 

the ground if the priorities of the Community 

Integration Action Plan are to be met. 

Many of the objectives in the Community 

Safety Action Plan have been met by IRIS’ 

key partners within the council. However, 

work around refugees and other migrants 

detained by the prison service has not been 

developed at all. There is also a need to 

monitor and evaluate how successful third 

party reporting 28 facilities have been in 

engaging refugee populations. It is 

necessary to determine the appropriateness 

of the sites currently used and whether 

more outreach work needs to be carried out 

to ensure that they are accessible. 

Many of the overall objectives and specific 

actions in the area of employment have not 

been met. In general, the ‘Priorities’ and 

‘Specific Actions’ identified in the plan are 

very broad and rely upon the support and 

action of other organisations and 

departments. 

IRIS is identified as the lead contact on only 

four out of the 22 actions which means that 

the success of the plan is almost entirely 

dependent on the responsiveness of key 

partners, particularly within the council. One 

of the main unmet actions identified in the 

plan is around the commissioning of 

employment and training services in the 

borough by the council. Currently, such 

commissioning is still not guided by targets 

for the number of refugees and migrants 

that are accessing services. 

Most of the objectives in regards to 

Education have been met but there have 

been delays in progress in some areas. The 

engagement of schools with Refugee Week 

activities has been slow. Reasons given for 

this by staff is that Refugee Week is not a 

timetabled teaching commitment and a 

significant proportion of the teaching staff 

are transient which makes it difficult to 

develop such activities. Another area that 

has been difficult to progress has been the 

provision of ESOL (English for Speakers of 

Other Languages) classes in community 

settings. The main reasons for this are the 

changes that have taken place at a national 

level. 29 Finally, delays in the development 

and roll out of Islington’s Children’s Centres 

impacted the development of a ‘One Stop 

Shop’ approach to refugee integration 

services. 

The area of Health has met some of the 

objectives detailed in the Action Plan but 

there is also a major gap in relation to 

training on cross-cultural issues and the 

eligibility of refugees and asylum seekers in 

relation to accessing healthcare services. 

Targets for such training include General 

Practitioner (GP) surgeries (including 

doctors, nurses and receptionists), dentists, 

other frontline staff in the health service and 

community based health workers. 

28 There are a number of ‘third party’ reporting centres that have been set up at community locations in Islington where members of the public 

can report a ‘hate crime’ without having to visit a police station. 

29 For more information see section 4.3 

13



Some of the objectives in the area of 

Housing have been met. Key work has 

been carried out by the Housing department 

to ensure that housing advice is provided in 

community settings that are more 

accessible to refugees and migrants. 

However, a key gap is the need to develop 

training for frontline staff on how to work 

with refugees. 

There is also still a need to ensure that 

Tenants and Residents Associations have 

more representation from refugees and 

that they are accessible for this population. 

4. The six key areas of integration 

The following sections detail the 

experiences of all stakeholders 30 in the six 

areas of integration prioritised by the 

strategy and action plans. As has already 

been mentioned, some service providers 

and partners were more likely to have 

strategic awareness and so the researchers 

were able to explore with them the 

perceived impact of the strategy on the key 

areas. Other service providers, 31 and some 

refugees and asylum seekers, were less 

likely to have come into contact with the 

strategy directly and so, in these instances, 

the researchers explored more general 

issues relating to experiences around 

integration. Although it is difficult to make 

connections between general evidence 

about integration and the impact of the 

strategy, the experience and knowledge 

imparted by interviewees can be used to 

inform future planning and work on refugee 

integration in Islington. 

4.1 Community integration 

The area of community integration cuts 

across all of the other priority areas as it 

has the broad aim of ‘ensuring that 

refugees are empowered to become full 

participants in their community’. 32 An 

important step towards meeting this overall 

aim is ensuring that the ‘primary’ integration 

needs of refugees are met around issues 

such as health, housing and employment so 

that they are able to engage at a community 

level. These issues are dealt with in detail in 

the relevant action plans. The community 

integration action plan focuses on more 

general priorities such as ensuring that the 

needs of RCOs are met in relation to 

capacity building, refugee services are 

accessible and the contribution of refugees 

to society are highlighted. 

30 Stakeholders include IRIS team members, service providers, partners, refugees and asylum seekers. 

31 

Some interviewees were both service providers and refugees. 

32 

The priority areas of community integration and community safety have now been merged into the one area entitled community 

cohesion. 

14



Service providers 

Interviewees described the often high levels 

of need amongst some new arrivals to the 

UK. The ongoing support needed to both 

kick-start and maintain the impetus towards 

integration is highlighted. Evidence 

suggests that once refugees are granted 

status they continue to have ongoing social, 

health and educational needs. It was also 

noted that although refugees may become 

more integrated over time their 

requirements are still likely to be different 

from those of both the host population and 

newly arrived refugee individuals or 

families. 

“Asylum seekers – refugees – become 

British Citizens BUT a lot of people with 

British passports still have needs. Long 

process and an ongoing need for 

encouragement into integration and 

development. Services can be limited to 

refugees and not taking into account 

changes of status the key point is the need 

for more open definitions” (Community or 

voluntary organisation) 

“The main issue for IRIS - there can be 

some practical steps to help integration in 

the short term such as information and 

access issues. But integration is a time 

thing – it might take generations” (Strategic 


The importance for quick and appropriate 

intervention was also noted: 

“Rapid response – the key thing is to stop 

new refugees from losing hope. There is a 

window of opportunity to help them before 

hope starts to diminish” (Strategic partner, 

statutory provider) 

IRIS has helped to improve the accessibility 

of services for refugees. However, there is 

room for more work to ensure that the 

existence of services are widely publicised 

through community partners, libraries, 

schools and the Directory. Continued 

partnership working is needed to embed 

this work. 

Where evidence was seen of effective 

capacity building activities with RCOs 

positive benefits had been significant in the 

areas of health, education and employment. 

However, given the key role that RCOs play 

in facilitating access to services within the 

borough more work could be done in this 

area. The recent joint funding to IVAC to 

support the Islington Refugee Forum, Black 

and Minority Ethnic Forum, and Faith Forum 

through the Islington Infrastructure Funds is 

a positive move. 

Refugees 

This section details the experiences of 

refugees and offers an insight into their 

priorities using the vignettes contained in 

the Appendices. The following findings 

relate to evidence collected using a range 

of methods, including interviews, focus 

groups and café surveys. 

Refugees and asylum seekers echoed 

service providers by highlighting integration 

as a long term process which needs 

ongoing support. It was also recognised 

that individuals with unresolved immigration 

status (such as asylum seekers) are 

particularly vulnerable as they are at the 

beginning of the integration process and are 

focusing on the absolute basics for survival. 

It is noteworthy that the Refugee Services 

Directory is now being used by many of the 

RCOs and service providers. This is an 

important example of the way in which 

15



RCOs and other Voluntary and Community 

Sector Organisations (VCSOs) e.g. faith 

based organisations, are the key points of 

entry to services within the borough for 

many interviewees. Where refugees are 

participating in social activities facilitated by 

RCOs and VCSOs there is a sense of well 

being, support and friendship. These 

organisations play a crucial role in 

facilitating communication and 

understanding of UK society and systems, 

particularly for those with limited or no 

English language. However, there are also 

an unknown number of refugees who are 

not linked in with any community-based 

organisations. 

According to the majority of interviewees, 

living in Islington has been, and continues 

to be a largely positive experience. There 

are, however, a number of issues that 

continue to act as barriers to integration. 

The most common point was the vital 

importance of language ability which acts 

as a key to so many other areas of 

integration. 33 

“[my] language was so limited I didn’t know 

how to access services, mostly uncles and 

friends helped me. The first time I went to a 

GP I didn’t say anything about my health 

problems” (Turkish woman) 

Improved ESOL (English for Speakers of 

Other Languages) provision is therefore 

seen as a priority. Other key areas of 

concern for refugees and asylum seekers 

are the need for settled and adequate 

housing, accreditation of prior learning and 

improved employment opportunities. It is 

also observed that work needs to be done 

on improving the confidence of refugees so 

that they are able to utilise their skills. 

These barriers are covered in more detail in 

the sections that follow. 

Evidence suggests that for some refugees 

and asylum seekers there is an element of 

consultation ‘fatigue’. The process itself is 

valued but only when seen to be linked to 

action or change resulting in a positive 

outcome. 

4.2 Community Safety 

It has been observed that refugees and 

asylum seekers are not only more likely to 

become victims of crime but they are also 

more likely to fear it than the rest of the 

population. They are also less likely to seek 

assistance from the police or other public 

agencies and are less likely to offer 

information or act as witnesses. This 

reluctance to access support services 

means that refugees can also have less 

options for dealing with offending in their 

own communities. 34 

The community safety action plan responds 

to such observations by identifying a range 

of priorities such as supporting refugee 

victims and witnesses, improving the safety 

of communities for refugees and 

encouraging the prevention, deterrence and 

conviction of refugee offenders. The 

following sections look at the perceptions 

and experiences of both refugees and 

service providers in relation to crime and 

community safety in Islington. The 

researchers also explored day to day 

feelings of security with refugee 

interviewees. 

33 

English language ability improves employment prospects, the navigation of systems and the ability to communicate with members 

of the host population, for example. 

34 

Mayor of London (2007) London Enriched. The Mayor’s Draft Strategy for Refugee Integration in London, Greater 

London Authority: London. 

16



Service Providers 

Some service providers from wellestablished 

refugee communities described 

living in Islington as a largely positive 

experience for their community and feel that 

they have a good working relationship with 

the police. 

“Islington is lucky because community is 

pretty safe. We’ve done our best to be in 

contact with the police and have a named 

PC to go straight to if there are any 

problems. We’re planning a workshop on 

knife and gun issues with our PC so that 

teenagers can attend” (Community or 

Voluntary organisation) 

However, interactions with the police have 

downsides for other community 


“Working with police has been really difficult 

– lots of documents – not enough time to 

read it all” (Community or voluntary 

organisation) 

One of the key initiatives encouraged by the 

council is the ‘third party reporting’ of crimes 

in community settings: 

“Experience has been both positive and 

negative. Council has been working to 

improve third party reporting: six to eight 

organisations to be able to report different 

crimes and this can be done anonymously” 

(Community or voluntary organisation) 

Interviewees highlighted the complexity of 

this policy area and, in particular, the 

diversity within refugee groups. The 

experience of different age groups and 

genders vary and so services require quite 

different strategic approaches to meet these 

diverse needs. For example, the safety 

issues experienced by young Somali men 

are quite different to ageing Somali 

grandparents fearful of walking the streets 

in the evening. 

35 BME (Black and Minority Ethnic) 

Interviewees felt that the strategy had 

improved awareness of the issues but that 

there were limitations. 

“…perhaps it unearthed more barriers than 

opportunities in my area of work, there is a 

need to ensure some protection from 

victimisation, harassment and other hate 

crimes but it’s difficult to identify routes out 

for information” (RSPB board member) 

Identifying solutions to these issues are 

challenging. This is especially so given the 

fact that RCOs and other VCSOs have 

limited resources and many are struggling 

to maintain core advice services, let alone 

additional services in relation to community 

safety. 

“capacity is a big issue; as BME 35 

organisations take on more and more, their 

capacity becomes limited to take on more” 

(Strategic partner, statutory provider) 

There is evidence that there has been a 

significant move forward in supporting 

refugee women who are survivors of 

domestic violence by enabling them to 

make informed choices. This work is 

ongoing through the Community Safety 

Partnership’s facilitation of the Domestic 

Violence BME Working Group which 

includes representatives of women’s 

community organisations working with 

migrants. The group works on strategic and 

operational issues such as eligibility for 

support and cultural barriers to accessing 

services for migrant women fleeing 

domestic violence. 

The disaffection of younger people within 

refugee groups was identified as a key 

issue. Some interviewees reported 

suspicion and mistrust of police amongst 

young refugees. Addressing the problem of 

youth disaffection was identified as a key 

priority. There was however recognition that 

it does not impact young refugees 

exclusively but affects many young people 

living in deprived urban areas where there 

are few opportunities. 

17




The majority of refugees interviewed 

reported that they feel safe living in 

Islington. The increased presence of Police 

Community Support Officers (PCSOs) was 

particularly highlighted and positively 

received. From a business perspective, 

three of four café owners felt that this had 

contributed to an increased sense of 

security. Whilst there were still some 

concerns raised by refugee community 

members around the illegal selling of 

cigarettes, drugs and mobile phones, many 

noted an improvement on the ground in this 

area and some attributed this to the 

PCSOs. 

Despite these positive findings, there were 

some serious concerns across community 

groups (Congolese, Somali, and Latin 

American) around youth gang culture, 

particularly in relation to knife crime. It 

appears that both the younger and older 

generations are worried about this issue. 36 

Some young male refugees felt that the 

frequency with which they experienced the 

practice of ‘stop and search’ is problematic. 

“Too many police doing stop and search in 

this area, I’m getting stopped up to 3 times 

a day” (African refugee) 

A number of male interviewees (ranging in 

age and nationality) stated that they 

sometimes feel ‘unsafe’ around the areas of 

Blackstock Road and Highbury Corner. 

Many female interviewees reported feeling 

safe in Islington during the day but nervous 

about going out after dark on their own. 

Another issue raised by a few female 

refugees was that they felt unsafe in 

respect to their immediate neighbours or 

with male members within their own 

communities. 

It was also highlighted that in comparison to 

men, women refugees are less likely to be 

able to speak English which impedes their 

ability to seek help with issues relating to 

personal safety. 

Whilst having a ‘third party reporting’ facility 

was clearly important to representatives of 

some community organisations, it was not 

highlighted by refugees themselves. This 

may be because it is a sensitive issue or it 

could be because the potential benefits of 

the facility have not filtered through to the 

wider community. 

4.3 Employment 

As mentioned in the introductory sections, 

improved levels of employment amongst 

refugees have been highlighted as a key 

driver for successful integration. This is 

because appropriate employment not only 

improves the financial security of individuals 

but can result in increased contact between 

refugees and the host population. 

Meaningful occupation can also improve the 

mental wellbeing of individuals. However, 

unemployment is much higher amongst 

refugees than it is for the population as a 

whole and there are a range of barriers that 

prevent refugees from participating in the 

labour market. 37 

The employment action plan highlights a 

number of priorities that aim to increase 

both the employment and retention rates for 

refugees in Islington. Examples include 

engagement with employers to identify skills 

shortages and to encourage a diverse 

workforce, the improved assessment of 

skills and experiences and the identification 

of the main barriers to employment. 

36 There is evidence that the Community Safety Partnership is responding to these concerns by providing staff to talk to 

young people in RCOs. 

37 

Jefferys, S; Beutel, M ; Paraskevopoulou, A; and Craw, M (2007) Employment, Skills and Training Needs of Refugees, 

Asylum Seekers and Recent Migrants in Haringey, Working Lives Research Institute, London Metropolitan University: London. 

18




In general, feedback indicates that patterns 

of unemployment tend to be higher 

amongst refugees than the host population. 

This is due to a number of factors including: 

lack of English language fluency; difficulties 

with the recognition of overseas 

qualifications; a lack of relevant 

qualifications and recent work experience; 38 

as well as issues around self confidence. 

Refugees have little awareness of council 

information, advice and guidance services 

and this has resulted in the low take-up of 

employment and training related provision. 

It would seem that when refugees are first 

looking for work they are more likely to use 

their community networks and are less likely 

than other groups to access official 

employment services. 

There is widespread support for the 

development of training programmes that 

are embedded with English language 

tuition. 

“….. getting work is more about ESOL 

needs and not so much about practical 

skills for work. It’s the language around the 

work and the need to communicate 

confidently in conversation.” (Statutory 

partner) 

On the ground there have been some 

successful projects which address the 

employment needs of refugees. Examples 

include ‘Construction Works’ (a councilbased 

project that incorporated input from 

IRIS during its development) 39 and the SIED 

project, 40 which uses business advisors who 

are drawn from refugee communities. The 

approach of the SIED project was 

highlighted as an effective way of engaging 

refugees and supporting them into 

employment. 

Those RCO members who have received 

training and accreditation through the SIED 

Project have not only gained paid 

employment themselves, but have also 

been able to support community members 

in either finding employment or setting up a 

business. 

“Tackling unemployment is key, economic 

regeneration via business support working 

with community organisations in general 

and including refugee communities” 


Whilst unemployment is a clear priority to 

address, underemployment is a less 

obvious but ubiquitous problem. Many 

professionals within refugee communities 

have to work at a capacity well below their 

capabilities, which can cause frustration as 

well as reduced confidence and selfesteem. 

It also results in a loss of resources 

for the host country. 

“I’m a qualified nurse and a nurse teacher in 

infection control. I have long experience in 

health profession but in UK …I’m working 

with voluntary sector as a health promoter & 

mentor. I’m seeking to be in health sector 

here…to go back into this profession” 


It was noted that there are a number of 

potential benefits resulting from 

employment. It can have a positive 

psychological impact on self worth 

(particularly for male interviewees) and 

mental health more generally. It can also 

provide a forum for using English; an 

opportunity that is not always possible in a 

home or community context where first 

languages are often used. Employment can 

also provide a space to engage with 

members of the host population which can, 

in turn, lead to improved integration. 

38 

This is often because of the restrictions that asylum seekers face with regards to work and the time it takes for asylum claims to be decided. 

39 

Construction Works is a project that offers training, apprenticeships, work experience and help with securing employment in the construction 

industry. 

40 

The SIED (Supporting Inclusion through Enterprise Development) partnership promoted self-employment in disadvantaged communities by 

training accredited ‘Community Based Business Advisors’. 

19



Single parents and young women need 

encouragement to explore training 

opportunities which can lead to future 

employment outside the home. However, it 

is recognised that attitudes to female 

employment outside the home can vary 

between cultures and social groups and 

that this can be a challenging issue to 

broach 

In contrast to the other areas of integration 

there appears to have been less 

engagement with the strategy from service 

providers and other stakeholders. A major 

reason for this appears to be the lack of 

funding allocated by the council to 

achieving the priorities identified in the 

employment action plan (which is the 

vehicle for delivering the strategy). 

Nevertheless, project leaders have 

commented on the support from the IRIS 

team in organising events around 

employment. An employment-related 

conference day during Refugee Week in 

2007 brought together a significant number 

of partner organisations that are working 

locally, regionally and nationally to provide 

education, training and employment 

opportunities for refugees. 


Refugee interviewees highlighted issues 

that are similar to those raised by service 

providers. Examples include the high levels 

of unemployment amongst refugees, the 

lack of accreditation of prior learning and 

qualifications, as well as the length of time it 

takes to re-qualify in the UK. These issues 

cause frustration for many qualified 

refugees who are forced to accept low paid 

employment, often outside their area of 

expertise. 

For others, who are experiencing difficulties 

in the recognition of overseas qualifications, 

business endeavours provide an alternative 

route to employment. However, one of the 

challenges in this area of work is the 

difficulty that individuals face when trying to 

secure start-up funding. 

It would seem that in the first instance many 

people find work through their community 

networks by word of mouth. According to a 

community based caseworker people don 

not tend to access official employment 

services until they have been employed and 

lose a job. By this stage they then know 

how to access Job Centre Plus. 

A particular frustration is that asylum 

seekers are not able to work while they wait 

for their claim to be processed. 41 Although 

volunteering can constitute a positive step 

towards employment it can become 

disheartening if it doesn't progress into 

sustainable paid employment. 

It has already been mentioned that the six 

different areas of integration, identified by 

the strategy, often overlap and impact one 

another. One such example was given on 

the issue of employment. Where an 

individual goes from part-time to full-time 

employment the transition not only impacts 

on their level of pay, but also affects their 

entitlement to welfare benefits (such as 

housing benefit and tax credits) and 

availability for ESOL classes. A change in 

the employment status of the individual can 

therefore make it harder for them to afford 

their current housing and difficult to attend 

classes to improve their English. However, 

the opportunity to work can in itself provide 

a space for language practice and to 

interact with new people. 

For some refugees, who have had limited 

access to education in their country of 

origin, the opportunity to set up a small 

business is a positive step forward. 

41 

From 2002 asylum seekers were no longer able to apply for permission to work (up until this point it had been possible to apply for permission 

after six months). In 2005 the law was modified and if an individual has not received an initial decision on their case after a year they are able to 

apply for permission to work. 

20



Finally, a number of interviewees 

highlighted the negative influence of underemployment 

and unemployment on selfesteem 

and the feelings of dependence that 

unemployment, in particular, can create. 

“If you have potential, (that is) have 

education, you can work and don’t need 

help from the government” (Eritrean man) 

Unemployment can contribute to mental 

health issues (particularly amongst men) 

and may force people towards the informal 

economy. Unemployment also impacts on 

family life in terms of child poverty and the 

frustration experienced by many who could 

be enabled to make more effective 

contributions to both their families and 

society. 

4.4 Education 

Educational opportunities and outcomes for 

both refugee adults and children are central 

to the improvement of refugee integration 

overall. Refugee children often start school 

with either limited, or no English and may 

have had their education interrupted in their 

country of origin. Before moving on to other 

forms of learning, a major priority for many 

refugee adult learners is the acquisition of 

English language skills. Education, in the 

form of vocational training and 

qualifications, can improve the employment 

opportunities for refugees. However, it is 

important to recognise that before 

educational issues can be addressed, the 

basic needs of refugees, in relation to 

housing and health, must first be met. 

The Education action plan 2005-2008 

focuses on improving the educational 

outcomes for refugees by highlighting 

issues such as the improved assessment of 

both adults and children and the increased 

delivery of ESOL classes by community 

groups. 

Another major priority is to improve data 

collection on refugees, promote best 

practice in the field and to monitor 

education integration strategies. In 

response to stakeholder feedback, which 

said that the original Education action plan 

was too broad, the plan was replaced in 

2007 by the ‘Improving Services for 

Refugee Children and Families Action Plan’ 

2007–2008. This replacement plan 

contained more targeted actions and 

brought together schools, children’s 

centres, young people’s services, adult and 

community learning and Social Services. 


It has already been noted that English 

language ability is a key priority because it 

underpins many aspects of integration. The 

lack of appropriate and accessible ESOL 

provision is therefore identified as a 

particularly frustrating area. Changes in 

government funding for English language 

support have directly, and negatively, 

impacted the ability of adult refugees to 

improve their language skills. 42 There is a 

need for more ESOL classes for students 

whose English is at ‘Pre-Entry’ and ‘Entry 

Level 1’ and the length of time that 

prospective students have to wait to access 

an ESOL (English for Speakers of Other 

Languages) course can be prohibitive. 

“We deal with adults mainly and English 

language needs are the most important – 

but the time lag is not good” (Strategic 


Another impact of the changes in eligibility 

for ESOL funding is to restrict access to 

those who are unemployed which means 

that some refugees are stuck in low-paid 

employment because their language ability 

is limited. 

42 

From 2007/08 ESOL provision is no longer free, except to ‘priority groups’, which include people who are unemployed or are receiving incomebased 

benefits. This means asylum seekers will not be automatically eligible for free tuition. Refugees who are unemployed or in receipt of incomebased 

benefits will still be eligible for free ESOL tuition. 

21



“People who are working, they can’t draw 

down any funding but people in low paid 

jobs need language to up skill” (Community 

or voluntary organisation) 

In addition: 

“(there have been cases)….of people 

having benefits cut and taken off courses 

because of Job Centre rules, which say 

they’re not sufficiently available for 

work…there are a lot of barriers” (Further 

Education Provider) 

In line with some of the points raised in the 

employment section is the observation that 

more needs to be done to improve the 

recognition of education achievements by 

refugees in their countries of origin. 

“A lot of difficulties because the British 

education system does not recognise our 

overseas degrees. This means people are 

often not working to an equivalent value 

here and if that person is around 50 both 

the wider community and the person are 

losing out. This is a big issue and 

conversion courses are needed” 


Other issues raised by service providers 

relate to the cultural differences in the way 

education and learning is approached. This 

can prove challenging for teachers and also 

refugee parents who may struggle to 

understand the UK educational system 

(especially when their own English 

language skills are limited). 

“Importance of breaking through the 

stereotypes and getting to the facts rather 

than forming only partially accurate 

judgements. For example lack of parental 

involvement in their children’s education 

might not be due to lack of interest – there 

may be practical barriers usually language.” 


“Approximately six out of ten Congolese 

pupils are not doing well – maybe there isn’t 

enough bilingual help for our community but 

may also be that they’re not receiving help 

at home because parents don’t have written 

English” (Community or voluntary 

organisation) 

Interviewees indicated that parental support 

for children’s education is likely to increase 

over time as the parent’s themselves 

become more confident and able to 

engage. 43 In general, the earlier children 

enter school the more positive their 

experiences and the easier they find it to 

adjust. There is evidence that homework 

clubs and after school activities are 

accessed by refugee families in schools 

that already have a higher number of 

refugee children. Of note is the partnership 

between EMAS and the Primary Strategy 

Early Years Team and the use of a bilingual 

support worker to help assess the needs of 

young refugee children. 

Joint work between key stakeholders was 

highlighted as key in addressing some of 

the issues relating to the education of 

refugee children. The strategy has 

encouraged some partnerships but there is 

also evidence of organisations initiating 

their own links. 

“Strong partnerships around mother tongue 

and supplementary schools - working with 

EMAS 44 and Islington Regeneration” 


The partnership work between EMAS and 

community organisations has helped to 

facilitate cross-cultural understanding 

between Children’s Services and other 

community groups. 

43 

For more information refer to ‘Vignette 15’ in Appendix 4. 

44 

EMAS (Ethnic Minority Achievement Service) 

22



Within the council’s Children’s Services 

department, 45 the strategy and associated 

action plan has produced some clear 

benefits in terms of coordinating efforts and 

moving the specific policy needs of refugee 

children to centre stage. 

“IRIS has helped us with our bids for funding 

– it will make sure we include refugees in 

our bid as a priority group” (Strategic 


“The purpose of IRIS is to raise the profile of 

refugees – to make people realise they have 

to deal with refugees. IRIS is having an 

impact – we will include work with refugees 

in our revised strategy and action plan” 


The strategic approach has been useful in 

drawing people together to focus on refugee 

issues. However, some service providers 

felt that the first education action plan was 

too broad, tried to cover too many complex 

areas of work and that this resulted in a lack 

of focus. Additionally, some of the activities 

identified in the action plan are not easily 

translated into action. It is felt that fewer 

points and greater clarity are more 

beneficial. 

It was observed that once refugees have 

been able to progress to college, the 

process of integration is well underway. 

However, whilst there is strong pastoral 

support 46 available when it comes to career 

advice there is “no formal tracking of job 

outcomes as yet, this is in the process of 

development” (Further Education provider). 

Across the board there is a need for more 

strategic intelligence and improved data as 

well as in-depth knowledge and 

understanding of refugee educational 

needs. 

“Not enough data available about who are 

refugees [within schools] so it is hard to 

target and evaluate with a degree of 

precision.” (Strategic partner, statutory 

provider) 

The need for more vocational courses with 

embedded ESOL provision was highlighted 

and it was suggested that it is beneficial to 

provide: 

“extra support to fast track bright students 

with English needs” (Strategic partner, 

statutory provider) 


As with service providers, the major concern 

for refugees and asylum seekers was the 

lack of appropriate ESOL provision. Some 

refugee interviewees feel that mainstream 

Further Education (FE) provision is inflexible 

and does not meet the needs of refugee 

adult learners. More needs to be done to 

ensure that the courses on offer are 

appropriate and available for learners whose 

English is at pre-entry and Entry Level 1. 47 

The provision of FE courses also needs to 

take into account the family commitments of 

potential learners (especially women) and 

address the provision of childcare (and the 

timing of courses) accordingly. 

“After one year they sent me a letter to say 

that I could go from 6-9pm. This was no 

good for family; I want morning because I 

have children” (Turkish woman). 

Young people who enter mainstream 

education post primary school age have 

greater difficulty adjusting to the system. 

Some refugee interviewees are frustrated 

because they felt that their teachers at 

secondary school equated limited language 

ability with lower education levels, or lack of 

intelligence. 

45 

Children’s Services safeguards and promotes the welfare of children, provides activities for young people, manages the rebuilding of 

schools and commissions a variety of services for children in the borough. 

46 

The Pastoral Support Programme (PSP) is a school based and coordinated intervention to help individual pupils to improve their social, 

emotional and behavioural skills. 

47 

Pre-entry level English is aimed at beginners and Entry Level 1 covers basic English language skills. 

23



“I left after a few months. Teacher’s 

expectations of me were too low, just 

because I come from Africa they don’t have 

high expectations for me” (Young African 

refugee) 

In another example, a refugee student who 

was gifted at mathematics, but who needed 

subject-specific language support, was 

assessed incorrectly and put into a lower 

level maths class. 

Interviewees reported positive experiences 

of Connexions workers 48 at colleges; they 

felt that the advice and guidance that they 

had received was useful. However, postcollege 

progression (post 18) becomes 

more problematic if the asylum claims of 

individuals have not been resolved. This is 

because asylum seekers are unable to 

access university courses without paying the 

same fees as ‘international students’ and 

these are much higher than those of 

‘domestic students’. 

For the majority of learners, the support of 

first language community organisations, 

family, friends and neighbours (or a mix of 

these), is essential. Without such support it 

would be much harder for refugees to find 

schools for their children and English 

language provision for themselves. 

4.5 Health 

The physical and mental health of refugees 

and asylum seekers impacts upon their 

ability to engage with other areas of 

integration such as employment and 

education. It has been observed that 

refugees and asylum seekers are more 

likely to face mental health issues than the 

rest of the population. 49 Reasons for higher 

levels of mental distress include: traumatic 

experiences in the country of origin and 

during their journey to the UK, social 

isolation, delays and difficulties in securing 

immigration status, as well as problems with 

accessing appropriate services and housing. 

In terms of physical health, there are a 

number of barriers that refugees and asylum 

seekers face in accessing healthcare 

services. Not only can cultural and linguistic 

differences prevent access, but so can a 

lack of knowledge about the processes and 

structures of the health care system in the 

UK. Finally, specific health conditions, such 

as tuberculosis and HIV and AIDS, are more 

prevalent in some refugee and asylumseeking 

groups than the general 

population. 50 

One of the key priorities identified by the 

Health Action Plan is to strengthen 

partnership work amongst key stakeholders 

in order to improve access for refugees to 

health services. Other priorities include 

ensuring that refugees and asylum seekers 

are provided with accurate and effective 

advice by improving the quality, breadth and 

availability of training for healthcare staff 

and professionals. 


Interviewees noted the particular challenge 

presented by the area of health in terms of 

coordinating work and resources. This is 

because PCTs (Primary Care Trusts) are 

large and complex organisations with 

targets and priorities set at a government 

level. Evidence from the interviews suggests 

that IRIS has formed some useful links with 

the PCT. The Refugee Services Directory is 

considered helpful and is used by the PCT 

staff, for example. Nevertheless, there is 

potential for much more partnership work 

between the PCT and IRIS. 

Mental health was highlighted as a major 

issue within refugee communities. One 

organisation felt that the strategy should 

encourage a more proactive and or 

preventative approach towards mental 

health issues and not only concentrate on 

treatment once an individual is suffering 

from mental distress. 

48 Connexions is a national information and advice service that works with 13-19 year olds. 

49 Tribe, R (2002) ‘Mental health and refugees’, Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, Vol 8 (4) pp 240–248. 

50 

Cherfas, L (2006) Negotiating Access and Culture: Organizational Response to the Healthcare Needs of Refugees and Asylum Seekers 

Living With HIV in the UK, RSC Working Paper No. 33, Oxford University: London. 

24



“So much emphasis on mental health when 

you’re actually ill but more preventative work 

needs doing particularly for men” 


It was felt important to prioritise funds and 

support for partnerships that adopt a holistic 

approach to refugee mental health. For 

example, it is important to address all of the 

stressors in an individual’s life. Support may 

be needed on a range of areas including 

housing, immigration and welfare support if 

a positive impact on mental health is to be 

achieved. 

The stress of coping with the asylum 

process not only creates its own pressures 

but can also act as a barrier to effective 

treatment for mental health issues. If an 

individual is expected to deal with past 

trauma then they need to feel secure and 

stable in their current situation. Another 

issue is the often lengthy waiting time for 

treatment faced by individuals suffering from 

traumatic stress. 

The shortage of (appropriate) housing 

means that it can be challenging to meet the 

needs of refugees. For example, hostel 

placements can be inappropriate for 

individuals who have suffered trauma and 

need a more secure environment. This is 

another example of where two areas of 

integration overlap and interact. 

Interviewees described a variety of 

experiences in relation to partnership work 

with the Council and the PCT. Some 

reported frustrations with both bodies, whilst 

others felt that the PCT was more 

approachable: 

“The PCT or mental health sector approach 

is more welcoming and straight forward than 

the Local Authority. With the PCT you can 

phone and get an answer. With the council 

there are layers of bureaucracy” 


It was also felt by one interviewee that the 

lack of consideration given to the structural 

barriers to healthcare faced by groups, such 

as refugees, has not been given enough 

attention in the past: 

“the commissioning structure has been 

geared up to individual health needs rather 

than groups BUT (the) structure within NHS 

now is shifting to accommodate some of 

these needs” (Strategic partner, statutory 

provider) 

The collective needs identified by 

interviewees included more translation and 

interpreting services as well as the actual 

delivery of services in other languages. 

“Community is experiencing some health 

problems because there are a lot of 

resources out there but in English, so we’re 

not getting the message” (Community or 


Evidence of health-related capacity building 

activities within RCOs was noted. Examples 

include the appointment of smoking 

cessation workers in both Turkish and 

Somali organisations. A promising model 

was felt to be the use of community based 

health advisors to identify early symptoms of 

tuberculosis. These advisors are based in 

RCOs but are funded and trained by the 

PCT. There is also evidence of capacity 

building support taking place both within the 

PCT and the voluntary sector to improve 

services for refugees with mental health 

needs. 

The types of activities listed above are 

examples of successful partnership work 

between the voluntary and statutory sectors. 

Nevertheless, there is an indication that at a 

grass roots level, there is a desire to 

strengthen relationships between the two 

sectors further. 

25



Some interviewees identified GP practices 

as potential gatekeepers to specific 

services, such as interpreting. It was also 

observed that some practices need to 

improve their knowledge around cultural 

differences in approaches to health, barriers 

to access and the specific support that is 

available for refugees and asylum seekers. 

In some instances lack of knowledge and 

cultural differences mean that refugees and 

asylum seekers do not approach the 

appropriate service for healthcare. 

“There’s no GP system at home so if you’re 

ill you go straight to the hospital” 

(Community and voluntary organisation) 

Some service providers felt that the 

dissemination of health information had 

improved in the last three years with more 

recently arrived refugees receiving an 

information pack and being directed to 

register with both a Health Centre and a GP 

on arrival. 


Interviewees in this section were all women 

from refugee backgrounds and employed in 

the health sector. These women either had 

professional health related qualifications in 

their country of origin and built on this 

training in the UK or had acquired 

qualifications subsequently. 

Many of the issues relating to health raised 

by refugee interviewees centre on access to 

the healthcare system. Refugees with 

limited English language ability may have to 

rely on friends or family to help them 

understand the system. However, it is not 

always appropriate for friends and family, 

especially children, to interpret in a healthcare 

setting. 

The use of unqualified and inexperienced 

interpreters can result in inaccurate 

information being relayed to the patient 

and/or children being exposed to 

inappropriate information relating to their 

parent’s health. 

The need for interpreting services to be 

made more accessible for refugees and 

asylum seekers was underlined. A lack of 

knowledge around the availability of 

interpreters means that some refugees have 

missed antenatal appointments, for 

example. The healthcare system in the UK 

is especially difficult to navigate for refugees 

whose countries of origin either have no 

such system or one that is very differently 

structured. 

As with service providers, mental health 

issues were highlighted by refugee 

interviewees. In particular was the point that 

trauma can affect the ability to learn a 

language and can also inhibit 

communication more broadly. However, it 

was felt that this can often be overcome with 

appropriate mentoring. It was also noted 

that there are many examples of refugees or 

asylum seekers that suffer from mental 

distress which is caused by social isolation. 

This underlines the point made above that 

mental health problems are not always, or 

only, caused by traumatic experiences in the 

country of origin. 

The issue of infectious diseases was also 

raised by some interviewees with the late 

diagnosis of TB a source of particular 

concern. Two possible reasons for this 

were identified: GPs don’t expect to see this 

disease in the UK and the language barrier 

affects accurate discussion of symptoms. 

The experience of GPs was varied with 

some providing an exceptional service and 

others seemingly too busy, or lacking the 

appropriate skills to provide adequate 

support for refugees. 

26



4.6 Housing 

Appropriate housing is a basic need and 

fundamental to the integration process. 

Without somewhere secure and suitable to 

live it is impossible for refugees and asylum 

seekers to engage with other aspects of 

their lives, such as education and 

employment. Inappropriate housing can 

also have a negative impact on other areas 

of integration, such as health, with poor 

living conditions and over-crowding 

increasing the likelihood of disease and 

mental distress. 

The strategy cannot engage with the direct 

allocation of accommodation as this is 

governed by national legislation and local 

allocations policies. As a result, the focus of 

the action plan is more on the provision of 

information and advice services to refugees 

and the coordination of efforts across the 

council. The focus of this section is on 

refugees, as opposed to asylum seekers, 

because the provision of accommodation 

for asylum seekers is coordinated and 

financed by central government. 


Interviewees from voluntary and community 

organisations noted that housing presents a 

particularly complex challenge which is 

defined by complicated systems as well as 

the scarcity and cost of accommodation in 

the borough. It was felt that the strategy 

needed to encourage a more proactive 

approach with a focus on advocacy as a 

means of addressing the housing needs of 

refugees. 

“They don’t know their rights and cannot 

advocate for themselves” (Community or 


“Lack of information and don’t know their 

rights as a tenant to get repairs done” 


One criticism levelled at the strategy is that 

more needs to be done to ensure that the 

priorities of the action plans are actually 

acted upon. 

“From the strategy there was going to be 

outreach work but this has not happened – 

where is it happening?” (Community or 


Experiences regarding housing services 

varied. Some interviewees observed that 

Islington is easier to work with than other 

boroughs on homelessness and examples 

were also given where housing officers have 

given advice in community settings. 

“One of the biggest issues from (housing) is 

that housing is too small – or not appropriate 

for health related issues – or landlord 

troubles. We’ve started a new initiative with 

Housing themselves in the council, who are 

now going to provide surgeries once every 

two weeks” (Community or voluntary 

organisation) 

However, some interviewees felt that it was 

difficult to get a response on housing issues 

from the council. 

“Mostly I have to write to MP (to get a 

response) especially in relation to housing” 


The evidence suggests that RCOs and 

voluntary sector organisations spend 

considerable time mediating housing issues 

on behalf of their client groups and that this 

is done with limited resources. It was 

observed that greater training and support 

was required for frontline staff, from both the 

voluntary and statutory sector, with regard to 

the entitlements and services available for 

refugees and migrants. Respondents also 

felt that there was little evidence of crosscultural 

knowledge amongst housing staff. 

27



Homelessness was identified as a key issue 

which affects single adults in particular. 51 

Many interviewees reported that people who 

are homeless struggle to access appropriate 

housing and often need support to help 

them address their situation. 

“They often don’t know the system so there 

is a role for a lot more education” 


It was also noted that people in low paid 

employment have difficulties meeting their 

housing costs: 

“Those who are working, not earning 

enough to fully pay rent, there are arrears 

issues, we have been working with IRIS 

around this which helps, and helps with 

council’s understanding of how to set it up 

and be inclusive” 


Many interviewees were keen to highlight 

that refugees are only one of several 

potentially vulnerable groups where 

homelessness and housing issues present 

challenges for providers. The importance of 

recognising different housing needs, 

between and within refugee communities 

was also underlined. Interviewees observed 

that needs can vary on the basis of age and 

according to situation. For example, families 

with children are going to have very different 

needs from elderly refugees. In the case of 

young people, interviewees reported that 

“[private] landlords abuse them with both 

charges and the state of housing”. 

Nevertheless, it was felt important to identify 

the potential barriers to accessing services 

for each group. For refugees, the effective 

communication of information housing rights 

and processes is important because there 

are potential linguistic and cultural barriers 

in operation. 


Three major concerns in relation to housing 

emerged from interviews with refugees. The 

first is in relation to the quality of housing 

and the standard of the surrounding 

environment in terms of cleanliness and 

safety. The lack of insulation in older council 

accommodation is a particular concern 

given the high heating bills this generates. 

The quality of private accommodation was 

also questioned. One interviewee described 

appalling living conditions before he was rehoused 

after a significant amount of time by 

the local authority, along with his wife and 

baby. 

Another female interviewee described the 

insecurity that she felt as a result of being 

placed in an area where drug dealing and 

robberies were prominent. 

“The police need to work more closely with 

the community. People want to live in a safe 

environment” (Refugee woman) 

The second concern highlighted by 

interviewees centres on the linguistic and 

cultural barriers that some refugees face 

when trying to engage with housing staff. In 

line with the reflections of service providers 

is the third concern expressed by 

interviewees: the complete lack of 

accommodation options for single people. 

Refugees described a range of issues 

connected to living in council-provided 

accommodation. Of particular concern are 

the delays in responding to requests for 

repairs and the negative impact that these 

conditions can have on the health of 

tenants. The reflections of one young 

woman demonstrated how a bad housing 

situation can negatively impact upon both 

the physical and mental health of 

individuals. 

51 Homelessness legislation only covers those in ‘priority need’ which includes, for example, people with children, who are pregnant, who are 

aged 16-17 and some care leavers. 

28



The timescale for a positive result from 

housing applications was reported to have 

worsened over time by some people. It 

was also felt that engaging the 

appropriate individuals at council offices 

often proved to be difficult. However, 

despite these problems, it was felt by 

some that the quality of emergency 

accommodation in Islington has improved. 

5. Discussion 

There was evidence from young people 

who had arrived in the country as 

unaccompanied minors that they had 

been largely well supported into 

appropriate housing post-18. However, 

other young people found it more difficult 

to find accommodation beyond the family 

home once they had reached 18 

because private rentals are too 

expensive. 

This section of the report highlights the key 

findings of the research as well as 

discussing the context and implications of 

these findings. The evaluation has identified 

a number of strengths, both in terms of the 

strategy’s content and delivery. One of the 

major achievements is the way in which the 

sheer existence of a refugee integration 

strategy has encouraged stakeholders (both 

within and outside the council) to have an 

overview of the work that is being done in 

this area. Another effect has been to 

coordinate work through partnerships and 

networking. IRIS has been identified as a 

proactive and approachable team which 

has done well at raising awareness of the 

strategy amongst key stakeholders in the 

borough. 

Awareness of the strategy 

The evaluation found that awareness of the 

strategy is much better amongst managers 

than it is amongst front-line staff. There is 

therefore a need to actively promote the 

benefits of a strategy at the delivery level so 

that front-line staff can see how their work 

fits into the larger picture. Section 4 of this 

report shows how the different areas of 

integration overlap and impact one 

another. 52 

It is therefore important for professionals 

and service providers within sectors such 

as health, education and housing to work 

together in order to engage with the ‘whole 

experience’ of a refugee rather than 

segmented areas of priority. 

Securing support for the strategy 

Although most of the partners interviewed 

understood the importance and relevance 

of refugee integration to their work it is 

important for IRIS to remain mindful of the 

full range of demands and pressures on the 

resources of service providers. Some 

partners are finding it hard to give the 

strategy priority in practice because they 

are busy with service provision and do not 

have the capacity to engage at a strategic 

level. Also, because there is no direct 

funding attached to the strategy, some 

service providers feel that they need to 

prioritise their efforts in areas which they 

feel are more likely to result in improved 

resources for their organisation. 

These findings demonstrate that it is 

necessary to show how strategic priorities 

translate into practical initiatives and how 

the strategy can benefit service providers. 

One of the key achievements of the 

strategy has been the coordination of work 

52 For more information see section 4.3 

29



with an emphasis on reducing duplication 

and filling gaps in refugee integration 

services. This work is of direct benefit to 

service providers as it can provide input for 

their project planning and evidence for 

funding applications. Additionally, whilst IRIS 

cannot directly fund projects there is 

capacity within the service to provide support 

to key partners with funding applications. 

The findings of the evaluation have shown 

that an important part of securing support for 

the strategy was the consultation process 

that preceded it. It is therefore vital to ensure 

that feedback from key stakeholders 

continues to inform future versions of the 

strategy and action plans. Nevertheless 

there is a balance to be struck between 

consultation and action. Service providers, 

refugees and asylum seekers have all 

indicated that over-consultation can be an 

issue. It is important for IRIS to identify 

mechanisms which ensure that feedback 

continues to be sought without undue 

pressures being placed on partners. Where 

possible, it may also be appropriate to 

ensure that participants are updated on 

developments in the areas of work that have 

gone out for consultation. 

Refugee integration work 

There are examples of excellent work on 

refugee integration being carried out by a 

range of organisations in the borough. 

Islington hosts a large number of RCOs and 

other voluntary organisations that work hard 

to raise awareness of refugee issues and to 

address the needs of refugees and asylum 

seekers. It is important to be sensitive and to 

acknowledge successful projects and good 

practice that have been developed 

independently from the strategy. The key 

role that stakeholders play in actually 

delivering services is central and this also 

needs to be given due recognition. 

IRIS has used the strategy to try and improve 

coordination of work on refugee integration. 

As they stand, the action plans encompass 

all of the work that needs to be carried out by 

organisations and departments working in 

the six areas. Some of this work may require 

input from IRIS and other areas may not. It is 

therefore suggested that a clearer division 

can be made between the work of IRIS and 

the work of other departments and 

organisations. This would make it easier to 

distinguish between the coordinating role of 

the service and its more practical functions. 

In some areas of refugee integration there is 

a need for more regular review and 

exchange of knowledge amongst key 

stakeholders. Little headway has been made 

in the area of employment for example and it 

is necessary for IRIS to explore ways in 

which the key stakeholders in this area can 

be encouraged to work together. 

These observations prompt questions 

regarding the positioning of the strategy and 

IRIS in relation to other stakeholders. Should 

the IRIS team be leading from the front, with 

a high profile, or work more discreetly behind 

the scenes by enabling others to work 

effectively? These are likely to be decisions 

that the team makes on a case-by-case 

basis depending on the context of their work 

and the degree to which efforts have already 

been coordinated by key partners. 

Given that IRIS has limited resources in 

terms of staff time, it is necessary for the 

team to be strategic about the areas in which 

they choose to prioritise their efforts. The 

previous sections have shown that IRIS’s 

level of engagement can vary. One element 

of the IRIS remit is strategic engagement 

with various council departments to ensure 

that refugee issues 

30



are incorporated in more mainstream 

agendas, the encouragement and 

facilitation of partnership work and the 

general coordination of efforts in the 

refugee sector. Another element is 

operational work, such as the coordination 

of Refugee Week and involvement on a 

more practical level with projects such as 

the Women’s Design Service and the EASI 

partnership. 

To date, there appears to be limited 

rationale for when IRIS does, or does not, 

engage in partnership work on a practical 

level. It is therefore important for the team 

to provide clear justification for when they 

will become more practically involved in 

projects and on what issues. It is suggested 

that areas where gaps in services have 

been identified should be prioritised. 

Mainstreaming refugee issues 

One of the central aims of the strategy is to 

ensure that refugee needs are addressed 

by mainstream strategies and services. The 

evaluation has found that IRIS has done 

well to ensure that the priorities and 

objectives of the refugee strategy are 

reflected in a range of strategies on 

everything from housing and health to 

education and children. However, despite 

the willingness of some partners to work on 

these issues, refugees are not the only 

priority and ensuring that these strategic 

commitments are translated into practical 

outcomes will require ongoing work. 

With these observations in mind it is vital to 

ensure that the actions agreed between 

IRIS and various departments are realistic 

and that there are funding routes identified 

for actions that need additional resources. 

In terms of ensuring that strategic 

commitments are met, it may be possible to 

use the Departmental Equality Action Plans 

as a mechanism for monitoring services 

provided by the council. 

Refugees and service providers 

Interviews with refugees, asylum seekers 

and service providers demonstrate that 

there continues to be a range of unmet 

need around integration in a variety of 

areas. It is important that these issues 

inform the development of the strategy and 

associated action plans. However, given 

that some areas fall under the remit of 

central government, such as housing 

legislation, the amount that can be done at 

a local level will be restricted. 

The most common issue raised by 

interviewees was the absolutely vital role 

that language ability plays in the integration 

process as well as the need for more and 

better quality ESOL provision. This issue 

cuts across all of the areas of integration as 

it affects an individual’s employment 

prospects, ability to access healthcare, 

education, learning and many other 

services. 

In the following sections the key issues 

raised by interviewees are identified. The 

implications that these issues have for 

future objectives are also highlighted. 

Community integration 

Interviewees felt that work around refugee 

integration should involve short-term 

intervention after arrival, and also more ongoing, 

long-term work, for those who need 

it. 

There is an unknown level of need amongst 

refugees and individuals who are not 

engaged with any community-based 

organisations. Given that IRIS mainly works 

in partnership with these groups it is 

important to assess the level of unmet need 

and explore alternative and additional 

methods of engagement. Capacity-building 

work with Refugee Community 

Organisations has been effective but there 

is a need for more work to be done in this 

area. 

31



There is a degree of ‘consultation fatigue’ 

amongst refugees, asylum seekers and 

community organisations. It is important to 

strike a balance between consultation and 

action and to explore a variety of methods 

for gathering evidence that are less onerous 

than interviews. Where possible, it may also 

be appropriate to ensure that participants 

are updated on developments in the areas 

of work that have gone out for consultation. 

Finally, care should be taken when 

consulting with ‘refugee communities’ as 

the views of ‘spokespeople’ from particular 

nationalities or ethnicities do not always 

coincide with the experiences and opinions 

of the group they represent. Although the 

term ‘the Islington refugee community’ is 

understandably used as shorthand, it can 

also be argued that this is over-simplistic 

and no such entity exists. Instead there are 

refugee communities and within each of 

these are further divisions on the basis of 

gender, age, class, etc. Similarly, the term 

‘refugee’ is not a fixed category as an 

individual’s legal status may not coincide 

with their experience on the ground or how 

they identify. For example, some refugees 

prefer to define themselves as citizens and 

shed the refugee label but may still have 

service needs that relate to their ‘refugee 

experience’. Other individuals may have 

very similar experiences to refugees but 

have a different immigration status. All of 

these issues around labelling, identity and 

representation must be borne in mind when 

undertaking consultation, drafting policy and 

providing services. 

for this group. It is also necessary to review 

domestic violence support services in the 

same way. If appropriate, it may be 

necessary to look at raising awareness 

about these community safety initiatives 

amongst refugee populations. 

Mental health was highlighted as a major 

issue by both refugees and service 

providers and there was a suggestion that 

the strategy should encourage a more 

preventative approach towards mental 

health rather than only focusing on 

treatment once an individual is suffering 

from mental distress. 

Housing 

Service providers observed that there is a 

need for better training and support for 

frontline staff in both the voluntary and 

statutory sectors, in relation to the housing 

entitlements of refugees and related 

processes. 

The provision of housing advice in 

community settings was highlighted as an 

effective way of ensuring that refugees are 

given appropriate advice. 

As with many other groups, refugee 

interviewees were concerned about the 

quality of housing and their immediate 

environment. One way of addressing this 

concern is by exploring ways in which 

Tenants and Residents Associations are 

more accessible to refugees. 

Community safety 

Although service providers highlighted the 

importance of third party reporting, refugees 

and asylum seekers did not raise this as an 

issue. As a result, it is important to review 

the provisions that are currently in place in 

order to determine how accessible they are 

32



Education 

Service providers identified a need for more 

ESOL classes particularly at ‘Pre-entry’ and 

‘Entry’ levels. It is therefore necessary to 

identify existing classes and, if appropriate, 

promote them through relevant 

organisations. It is also important to 

encourage providers to address the 

circumstances of learners by providing 

childcare and ensuring that the timing of 

courses is appropriate. 

Partnership work in the field of education 

between statutory and voluntary 

organisations was highlighted as 

particularly effective by service providers. 

These successful partnerships should be 

used to explore new ways in which children 

and potential adult learners can be reached 

by support services. 

Health 

The two main issues raised by refugees 

and asylum seekers in relation to health are 

the lack of appropriate interpreting and the 

cultural barriers that individuals may face 

when trying to access healthcare. Service 

providers suggested working with GP 

surgeries in order to address these barriers 

as they often act as gatekeepers to other 

services. 

It was observed that some practices need 

to improve their knowledge around cultural 

differences in approaches to health, barriers 

to access and the specific support that is 

available for refugees and asylum seekers. 

The experience of GPs is varied with some 

providing an exceptional service and others 

seemingly too busy, or lacking the 

appropriate skills to provide adequate 

support for refugees. 

The levels of crime and disaffection 

amongst some refugee youth and their 

distrust of police was a major concern for 

refugee interviewees. There is therefore a 

need to explore how the police and 

community groups can work together to 

address these concerns. 

Some refugee respondents highlighted the 

positive impact of visible community policing 

and so success in this area could be built 

upon. 

Employment 

Service providers are keen to see that 

employment models with proven success 

(such as the use of refugee business 

advisers) are given appropriate promotion 

and support. 

It was noted by service providers that the 

take up of mainstream employment services 

by refugees is low because there is a lack 

of information about such services and 

because they are more comfortable 

approaching their own networks for 

assistance. It is therefore necessary to not 

only improve the awareness of employment 

services amongst refugee populations but 

to also ensure that services are appropriate 

and address the needs of this group. 

Both refugees and service providers 

identified a wide range of barriers to 

employment which need to be taken into 

consideration when designing a holistic 

package of employment support. The level 

of intervention is likely to vary dramatically 

and will depend on the situation of each 

refugee. For refugee professionals one of 

the major issues is underemployment 

whereas other refugees may need help with 

confidence building and ESOL classes. It is 

important that these ‘pathways’ into 

employment are tailored to meet the 

individual needs of refugees and that any 

gaps in existing services are addressed. 

Service providers noted the success of 

training programmes that are embedded 

with English language tuition. There is a 

need for such programmes to be expanded 

and promoted in the borough.



A broader remit? 

In the light of increased migration from new 

EU Accession States to Islington, there are 

arguments for strategic work on refugee 

issues to be broadened by including 

migrants. This evaluation was asked to 

comment briefly on the viability of this policy 

direction in the light of the evidence 

contained in this report. During the 

evaluation of the strategy the researchers 

found that many of the issues raised by 

refugees and asylum seekers in relation to 

integration and service provision were 

similar to those raised by other migrants. 53 

Additionally, many RCOs and VSCOs work 

with a range of migrants and not just 

refugees and asylum seekers. It is therefore 

possible to build on the knowledge and 

resources that have been developed 

around the strategy in order to address the 

needs of Islington’s changing population. 

The key benefits of broadening work around 

the current refugee strategy to incorporate 

migrants are as follows: 

 

 

 

 

Strong networks have already been 

developed 

IRIS has a good knowledge of the range 

of services 

Many of the relevant issues for migrants 

have already been identified 

Current work around refugee integration 

is respected 

The main risk of this approach is that 

although there are overlaps with migrant 

issues the needs, experiences and 

characteristics of refugee communities are 

still specific and are distinct from those of 

migrant communities from the new EU 

states. It is important that these differences 

are reflected in a responsive and discerning 

approach where “one size definitely does 

not fit all”. 

There is therefore an argument that a small 

task force might be formed, based on 

existing networks. The terms of reference 

for this task force might include: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To establish the specific needs of 

migrant groups (in general), as opposed 

to refugee groups (in particular) 

To establish the implications for 

providers of services 

To develop an inclusive and agreed 

‘vision’ for the approach 

To identify the resource implications for 

undertaking an integrated approach 

To secure an agreement for a unified 

approach to managing migrant needs 

To develop an implementation plan 

53 For more information refer to section 2.



6. Conclusion 

Overall, Islington’s Refugee Integration 

Strategy has helped to create a clear vision 

for refugee integration in the borough by 

coordinating and focusing the efforts of 

relevant stakeholders. Key achievements 

resulting from IRIS’s work around the 

strategy include the development of the 

Refugee Services Directory, the 

organisation of Refugee Week and the 

inclusion of refugees in a number of council 

strategies across a range of issues. IRIS is 

seen as the ‘human face’ of the strategy 

and has a positive profile amongst partner 

organisations. The service has supported 

and developed a number of successful 

partnerships around a range of issues and 

continues to initiate ideas for the improved 

coordination and provision of integration 

projects and services. 

Despite these achievements there are 

some areas in need of development and 

key challenges that must be addressed. 

There is inconsistency in activity across the 

six different areas of integration with less 

headway made on the areas of 

employment, health and housing than 

community integration, community safety 

and education. There is little awareness of 

the strategy beyond management levels 

(both within and beyond the council) and a 

lack of clarity around how strategic 

commitments translate into practical 

outcomes. The evaluation also found that 

knowledge about the different areas of 

integration is not always shared effectively 

between individuals and organisations. This 

results in the knowledge of some 

stakeholders being limited to their particular 

area; despite the fact that the different 

areas of integration overlap and entwine in 

people’s lives. 

Islington hosts a number of excellent 

organisations working on refugee 

integration. RCOs and VCSOs function as 

key entry points to services within the 

borough for many refugees and asylum 

seekers. It is important that their work is 

supported and their contributions 

recognised. With this in mind, it is perhaps 

necessary to acknowledge any work that 

develops independently from the strategy at 

the same time as continuing to ensure that 

there is a clear focus and cohesion for 

integration activities in the borough. It is 

also important to distinguish between the 

coordinating role of IRIS and its sometimes 

more practical function. There should be a 

clear rationale for any practical initiatives 

that are undertaken. 

The evidence presented in this report has 

shown that the process of integration is 

complex and covers a range of policy 

areas. Interviews with refugees and asylum 

seekers have highlighted issues relating to 

healthcare access, educational and 

employment opportunities, experiences of 

housing in the borough, perceptions of 

safety and concerns around crime (to name 

but a few). All of these areas are interlinked 

and impact one another. It is therefore 

necessary to take a holistic approach to 

refugee integration and ensure that the 

efforts of service providers and policymakers 

are cohesive by coordinating work 

across the range of issues. Islington’s 

Refugee Integration Strategy and the work 

of IRIS around this strategy have gone a 

long way towards coordinating work in the 

borough. Nevertheless, there are still some 

gaps in service provision. Strong 

partnership work between key stakeholders 

is essential to addressing these gaps and 

ensuring that the full potential of refugees 

living in Islington is realised. 

35



7. Recommendations 

General 

Community Integration 

 

The profile of the strategy should be raised 

by highlighting instances where IRIS has 

been involved in successful projects or 

initiatives, the allocation of additional 

resources and effective partnership work. 

 

The work of RCOs and other voluntary 

groups in Islington needs ongoing 

support in the form of funding, capacity 

building and the promotion of good 

practice. 

 

There needs to be more effective transfer 

of knowledge between key stakeholders in 

the field of refugee integration so that 

practitioners and policymakers have a 

more holistic picture of needs and 

experiences in the borough. 

 

Work needs to be done on assessing 

the level of unmet need amongst 

refugees and asylum seekers who are 

not engaged with RCOs or other 

voluntary organisations. 

 

 

 

IRIS should continue to engage with 

service providers, refugees and asylum 

seekers. However, it is important to 

address the issue of ‘consultation fatigue’ 

by exploring alternatives to meetings and 

the provision of incentives for engagement. 

Clear outcomes from consultations must 

be fed back to participants. 

A clear rationale should be given when 

IRIS moves beyond a coordinating role 

and into more practical work. 

To consider expanding strategic work 

around refugee issues to include the 

integration needs of migrants. 

Community Safety 

 

 

IRIS should work with the Islington 

Domestic Violence Project Team, and 

relevant community organisations, to 

ensure that refugees are able to 

access appropriate community safety 

services. 

The third party reporting provisions 

currently in operation should be 

reviewed in order to check their 

efficacy and accessibility for refugees 

and asylum seekers. 

36



Employment 

IRIS should continue to pursue 

strategic engagement with the council 

on the issue of employment. 

 

 

Potential enterprise opportunities for 

refugees should be explored with 

community organisations and ideas for 

‘start-up funding’ developed. 

The efforts of employment services for 

refugees in the borough needs better 

coordination. 

Health 

The accessibility of interpreting 

services used by the PCT should be 

reviewed by IRIS in conjunction with 

the PCT. 

 

The possibility of awareness-raising 

and training with GP surgeries should 

be explored in conjunction with the 

PCT. 

Housing 

Education 

 

IRIS should engage with Islington Adult 

and Community Learning Service in 

order to improve the provision of ESOL 

classes in the borough. Particular 

attention should be paid to the timing of 

classes, the availability of childcare, the 

provision of pre-entry level and entry 

level and vocational courses 

embedded with ESOL. 

 

 

 

Housing advice services in Islington 

should be reviewed and any training 

needs around refugee issues 

identified. 

Islington housing department should 

consider expanding the number of 

housing advice sessions in 

community settings. 

The accessibility of Tenants and 

Residents Associations for refugees 

should be reviewed with the aim of 

improving refugee representation. 

37



Glossary 

Asylum Seeker 

A person who has left their county of origin and has an outstanding claim to be considered for 

refugee status with a state that is party to the 1951 Refugee Convention. 

Refugee 

The term ‘refugee’ has a strict legal definition laid out in the 1951 Refugee Convention. A refugee 

has made a successful claim for asylum and has been recognised to be in fear of persecution ‘for 

reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion’. 

Refugee Convention 

The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees is the key legal document in defining who 

is a refugee, their rights and the legal obligations of states. This is read in conjunction with the 

1967 Protocol which removed geographical and temporal restrictions from the Convention. 

Refugee Community Organisations (RCOs) 

RCOs are organisations that are established by refugees and asylum seekers themselves. They 

are often rooted within, and serve particular nationalities or ethnic groups. 

Statutory Sector 

The statutory sector is made up of orgnaisations that have to exist by law. Examples include 

Islington Council and NHS Islington. 

Voluntary and Community Sector Organisations (VCSOs) 

The voluntary and community sector consists of organisations whose 

primary objectives are social rather than economic. The core of the sector includes charities, 

religious organisations, arts organisations, community organisations and campaigning 


38



Acronyms 

BME 

BRIL 

DIUS 

EMAS 

ESOL 

FE 

GP 

IRIS 

LSMP 

PCT 

RCO 

RIES 

RSPB 

VCSO 

Black and Minority Ethnic 

The Board for Refugee Integration in London 

Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills 

Ethnic Minority Achievement Service 

English for Speakers of Other Languages 

English for Speakers of Other Languages 

General Practitioner 


London Strategic Migration Partnership 

Primary Care Trust 

Refugee Community Organisation 

Refugee Integration and Employment Service 

Refugee Strategic Planning Board 

Voluntary and Community Sector Organisation 

39



References 

Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (2008) Focusing English for Speakers of 

Other Languages (ESOL) on Community Cohesion, DIUS: London. 

Cherfas, L (2006) Negotiating Access and Culture: Organizational Response to the Healthcare 

Needs of Refugees and Asylum Seekers Living With HIV in the UK, RSC Working Paper No. 33, 

Oxford University: London. 

Fletcher, E (2007) “I never beg me bread yet” Review of Access to Benefits in Islington for Older 

People from BME groups, Age Concern: London. 

Home Office (2006) A New Model for National Integration Services in England. Consultation 

Paper, Home Office: London. 

Jefferys, S; Beutel, M ; Paraskevopoulou, A and Craw, M (2007) Employment, Skills and 

Training Needs of Refugees, Asylum Seekers and Recent Migrants in Haringey, Working Lives 

Research Institute, London Metropolitan University: London. 

Knight, P and Saunders, M. (1999) ‘Understanding Teachers. Professional Cultures Through 

Interview: A Constructivist Approach’, Evaluation and Research in Education Vol 13 (3) pp144- 

157. 

Kofman, E and Lukes, S (2006) Mapping Research on Refugees in the Borough of Islington, 

London Borough of Islington: London. 

London Borough of Islington (2006) Islington Refugee Integration Strategy 2005-2008, London 

Borough of Islington: London. 

Mayor of London (2007) London Enriched. The Mayor’s Draft Strategy for Refugee Integration in 

London, Greater London Authority: London. 

Tribe, R (2002) ‘Mental health and refugees’, Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, Vol 8 (4) pp 

240–248. 

40

If you would like this publication in large print or Braille, audiotape or disc format please 

call 020 7527 2000. 

To request this document in another language call 020 7527 2000. 

If you would like further information on the External Evaluation of Islington Refugee Integration Strategy, please 

contact: 

Equalities, Refugee and Migrant Service 

Islington Council 

Islington Town Hall 

Upper Street 

London N1 2UD 

Telephone: 020 7527 7140 

Email: equalities@islington.gov.uk 

August 2009

External Evaluation of the Refugee Integration ... - Islington Council

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?