“The Auditor-General could look at how much motels are charging, including the damage they’re demanding be paid for, cleaning costs, laundry etc. Are they keeping records? Instead they make money from the [emergency housing grant] and there are no standards.” [Former resident of emergency and then transitional housing] “The finances [in motels receiving emergency housing grant funding] are out the gate, up to $1800-2000 a week for a single person. We raised concerns that HUD was paying for repairs for damage but the repairs were never done.” [Former transitional housing provider] Current and former residents, and housing/ benefit advocates, all shared experiences of being bounced around different systems, from MSD to HUD to KO, and being told that it was ‘someone else’s job’. Both clients and advocates also expressed their frustration with the lack of transparency over systems, policies and practices, including the administration and management of the housing register and the accreditation process for transitional housing providers. “It seems like MSD and HUD are playing off against each other. We’ll get told ‘oh, that’s MSD’s area’ and then ‘no, we’re being led by HUD.” [Transitional housing provider with significant background in social services] Some providers spoke about what they perceived as ongoing silos and separation between different government agencies and their policy areas. “It seems like transitional housing providers are viewed as entirely separate to the services that respond to family harm and therefore transitional housing providers are not empowered to deliver any of those additional services… we cannot contract for family harm services now even though that’s been a huge part of what we’ve always done.” [Transitional housing provider with significant background in social services] 34 Human Rights Commission “Housing managers have two screens [to see the different government department systems] but it doesn’t seem like they read or use the information they do have.” [Transitional housing provider with significant background in social services] Transitional housing providers expressed frustration that the individually contracted funding model in transitional housing can create a feeling of competing for the same limited funding. Providers expressed a desire to work together, not in competition, but struggled to do so because of this individualised contracting and limited resources. For example, they want to be able to refer a client to another transitional housing service that could deliver a specific type of support, but this is not always possible because the other provider is already at peak capacity. Multiple providers also told us how difficult it is to provide the wraparound support that clients need when their government funding only covers the bare minimum. We heard that many staff in these services end up working well beyond their paid hours to ensure people get help. This frustration was compounded for transitional housing providers when they compared their weekly funding for each family with the amount paid under the emergency housing grant. Residents, providers, and advocates all emphasised that even though they see individual providers trying to deliver real outcomes, the system does not support them and in some cases actively blocks them from making a positive difference for clients. “The system is rigged. People have cut corners. People have let things slide and no one wants to take accountability.” [Former resident of emergency accommodation]