A Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) report has found that sanctuary schemes “play an increasingly important role” in enabling survivors of domestic abuse to “remain safely in their homes” – but that provision of services are inconsistent across councils in England.
Part 4 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 places a statutory responsibility on Tier 1 local authorities in England to assess needs and oversee support for safe accommodation for victim survivors of domestic abuse and their children.
Domestic abuse is also a major driver of housing instability and homelessness in England. It is the second most common reason local authorities are obliged to find housing, accounting for 15.9% of households being owed a relief duty in December 2025.
Sanctuary schemes are multi-agency initiatives designed to help abuse survivors remain in their own homes, with support and security, if it is safe to do so.
The MHCLG’s report highlights that these services are “widely used” but “inconsistently defined,” leading to a variation in the delivery and quality of services across local authorities.
In some places, “sanctuary schemes” refer mainly to security measures, while in others it describes a broader service, combining security measures, specialist domestic abuse support and safety planning.
The MHCLG evaluation took place between 2025 and 2026. It also draws on evidence from in-depth case studies in eight local authorities, alongside a national survey of local housing authorities in England. In total, the report included interviews with 67 professionals and 19 survivors, while 119 local authorities responded to the survey.
Stephen Aldridge, director for analysis and data and chief economist, Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, writes: “Sanctuary schemes play an increasingly important role in enabling survivors of domestic abuse to remain safely in their homes, where this is their preference and assessed as safe.
“Sanctuary schemes can make a substantial difference to survivors’ safety, stability, and wellbeing when security measures are combined with effective specialist support. Survivors consistently described physical measures as increasing their sense of safety and reassurance within the home, reducing fear and anxiety, improving sleep, and enabling them to remain safely in their communities rather than facing further disruption or relocation.”
He added: “For many survivors with children, the ability to remain in their home was particularly important in maintaining children’s schooling, friendships, and routines, contributing to improved wellbeing and stability for the wider family. Participants also described broader impacts on confidence, independence, and recovery, particularly where dedicated support workers helped survivors navigate legal processes, access services, and rebuild emotional resilience.”
The report also highlights that sanctuary schemes are shaped by a set of legal, housing and practical constraints
that influence whether they can be delivered safely and lawfully in practice. In some cases, sanctuary is feasible with relatively few barriers. In others, factors such as tenure, perpetrator access to the home, landlord permissions and the availability or enforceability of legal remedies determine whether remaining at home is a safe and viable option.
The report states: “These constraints can directly affect the timeliness, consistency and accessibility of sanctuary schemes and help explain why the option is easier to deliver in some circumstances than others.”
The survey findings indicate that legal notices and orders operate alongside the sanctuary scheme in over half (63%) of the 105 local authorities that responded. Adridge writes: “This indicates that legal remedies are frequently used alongside sanctuary schemes but are not required in all cases.”
The report says the absence of a shared definition of sanctuary schemes – including shared language and minimum expectations – contributes to variation in practice, monitoring and eligibility.
It recommends establishing clearer guidance on the purpose of a sanctuary scheme, the relationship between security and support, and core delivery standards would provide a stronger foundation for all other aspects of delivery while still allowing flexibility to respond to local contexts.
The report found that local context “strongly shaped delivery”, with geography, housing tenure, landlord consent, local housing stock, contractor capacity, funding arrangements and local authority structure all influencing how quickly and consistently sanctuary schemes could be delivered.
It highlighted the “particular challenges” faced by two-tier local authorities, particularly where strategic responsibility sat with one authority and housing or installation responsibilities sat elsewhere.
Last month, the Social Housing Bill returned to Parliament, proposing to give social landlords and courts the ability to evict perpetrators of domestic abuse from social housing without the victim having to leave first.
