Home not a House

In recent years, Wales has made important strides in improving outcomes for care leavers. Initiatives such as the When I Am Ready scheme and the recognition of Housing First principles mean that many young people now transition into more stable accommodation than in the past. These changes are often described as “better than before.”

Yet my research asks a harder question: why do so many care leavers still feel that “better than before” is not good enough?

Beyond adequacy: the emotional dimensions of home

For young people leaving care, housing is not only a physical need but an emotional one. A flat or semi-independent placement may meet minimum standards, but if it lacks warmth, continuity, and a sense of belonging, it risks being “just a roof.”

Drawing on Winnicott’s concept of “good enough parenting,” I frame housing provision through a simple ladder:

Adequacy → a roof and basic safety.

Good enough → stability and support.

Belonging → a home with trusted relationships.

Many Welsh care leavers remain on the lower rungs of this ladder. Their experiences reveal a policy–practice gap: systems that focus on adequacy rather than emotional sufficiency.

International lessons: Finland and New Zealand

Comparative evidence shows that better alternatives exist.

In Finland, the Housing First for Youth model treats housing as a right and embeds relational support into provision. Young people receive stable accommodation alongside sustained adult relationships.

In New Zealand, the Transition Support Service extends help until age 25, recognising that most young adults rely on family well into their twenties. Evaluations highlight that care leavers value emotional safety and continuity with trusted adults as highly as housing stability.

These models demonstrate that belonging can be deliberately built into policy. Both challenge the assumption that providing a roof is sufficient.

Towards a new definition of success

My study explores how care leavers in Wales experience this gap between aspiration and reality. Through interviews with young people aged 17–25, I am examining how belonging, safety, and stability are understood in practice — and how policy can move beyond adequacy.

The findings will inform a new standard for measuring success: not only whether a young person is housed, but whether they feel at home.

Why this matters

This is not simply a matter of better services; it is a matter of justice. Care leavers are asked to navigate independence far earlier, and often with less support, than their peers. If we want them to thrive rather than merely survive, we must ensure housing and transition pathways provide both security and belonging.

“Better than before” should not be the benchmark. For care leavers, only good enough — grounded in safety, stability, and belonging — will do.