Search

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to discuss the current state of provision for homeless people in Prague. Design/methodology/approach – This is primarily a narrative account, though supported by and referenced with contemporary Czech social policy scholarship. It first traces the roots of the current situation through the history of the Czech legal framework for citizenship; the effects of communist-era ideology, when homelessness was simply hidden; and the post-communist (new-era) economic and political climate. The range of existing services is then described and analysed with respect to the difficulties in the demands posed for people in this situation. Findings – The paper outlines the current approach with outreach (“terrain”), engagement (“threshold”) and “accommodation” (support and rehab) services; and the challenges in transition from one to the next. Many systemic barriers remain for the re-integration of homeless people, stemming from attitudes within the community and amongst professionals, as much as a sheer lack of resources, or the psychological and emotional difficulties of the homeless themselves. Originality/value – There are few papers published internationally on homelessness in the new EU states. The similarity in the structure of services to what are sometimes called “staircase models” may therefore be instructive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To what extent can a country’s effectiveness in reducing child poverty be attributed to the size of family cash transfers (that is, both benefits and tax advantages) or to their design? In this paper, we disentangle the importance of each of these two factors, focusing on the family support system in Lithuania and comparing it with four other new member states. Both single parent and large families are increasingly susceptible to poverty in Lithuania. This contrasts with other former communist countries, namely Estonia, Hungary, Slovenia and the Czech Republic, which protect these family types much better. This paper examines whether their family transfer systems would achieve similar results in Lithuania. We employ the EUROMOD microsimulation tax-benefit model to swap family policies across countries and test whether size or design has greater effects on child poverty reduction in Lithuania. Hungarian, Slovenian and Czech policies would considerably improve the poverty situation among large families. Single parent families would only gain if Lithuanian spending on family transfers increased radically. Estonian policies would lead to mixed results: small gains for large families and losses for single parent families. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]