Research

A Critical Approach to the Efficiency of Third Sector Homeless Services in the City of Glasgow and the Extent of Collaboration with Glasgow City Council

 

Tommy Reid BA Hons, MA.

 

Glasgow is 850 years old in 2025 (Checkland, 1964) and has a population of 635,130 people living in Glasgow in 2021 and rising (Tait and Falcone, 2025). In Scotland, there are 45,000 third sector organisations. According to Glasgow City Council databases, there are 2,772 charities in Glasgow, some with paid staff in operation and some with volunteers. In the city of Glasgow, charity to the citizen is in high volume (MILLIGAN and FYFE, 2004). For years, the citizens of Glasgow have used the services of others to survive (Blackden, 1979). Life in Glasgow can be hard as it is an industrial city originally; the mortality of Glaswegians is early (Walsh et al., 2010), which is one reason that charity, community, and being neighbourly make the difference, contributing to the quality of lifestyles citizens in Glasgow experience (Traill, 2023).

 

Within Glasgow, the third sector operates under Glasgow City Council as the local authority (GCC), in which there are several “Glasgow effect” triggers. Those in particular are Squalor, Hunger, and Ignorance. These are three of the five giants (Klein, 1995) in which charities transcend aims and objectives thematic to the charity test (Lund, Greener and Powell, 2022; Crawford and Dougall, 2019a). All three go hand in hand when looking from an epistemology point of view; charities are experiencing this to be the case. In particular, we will be focusing on the three charities: The Homeless Project Scotland (2020), The Glasgow Mission (Mercer, 1985), and Simon Community (Crawford and Dougall, 2019a), who are at the forefront of services to aid homeless citizens and all based within two miles of each other. Homeless and first order needs charities such as these (TRUMP, 1991) have a daily motion of influx situations that require care and compassion from the services the charities provide. There are polarised views on the support each service provides, and all three have different relationships with GCC (Duncan, 1990a).

 

Homeless Project Scotland and Glasgow City Council Relationship

 

Homeless Project Scotland, SC050207 (HPS), a registered charity from 05 June 2020 (HPS, OSCR, 2025) and with a company number CS004656 (Companies House, 2020), has had many interactions on a daily basis with GCC about homelessness-based scenarios. HPS has an income of £390,935 in 2024 and outgoings of £288,111 (OSCR, 2026a). No staff costs as HPS is a voluntary run charity. Homeless Project Scotland commands a £102,824 surplus after spending on project costs (OSCR, 2026a).

 

HPS Co-founder Colin McInnes said in an interview with Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh on the YouTube channel Scotland Speaks with Alex Salmond (McInnes, 2025) that “Scotland has the strongest homeless legislation in the world”; however, what is on paper is different from what is actually practiced by local authority. Citizens are referred to HPS by GCC as the local authority has no resources for the homeless citizen. The co-founder of HPS states that the council has a “duty of care” under Scottish legislation passed by the Scottish parliament (Watts et al., 2021) in the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987, which states local authority has a responsibility to ensure that homeless citizens are provided accommodation. Mr McInnes states that “the system is failing because the system does not care” (McInnes, 2025, 11:50).

 

In 2024, a community system under the Merchant City and Trongate Community Council (MCTCC) had raised an enforcement notice to close the HPS night shelter at 71 Glassford Street in Glasgow (MCTCC, 2024), which put a rupture in place against the democratic rights that a homeless citizen has as part of the community (Duncan, 1990a). “GCC” oversee the MCTCC who have placed the enforcement notice on HPS (Third Sector, 2024) - who GCC have been using to refer people to a service of support.

 

The leader of GCC Susan Aitken had visited HPS at the Argyle street food kitchen under the Hielanman’s umbrella. The GCC leader was in the project for ten minutes inside the building and then walked past 300 people who were awaiting food, to cross the road; and after looking at some food tables announced another engagement awaited and left (McInnes, 2025, 14:29-15:02). The MCTCC who have applied for a closure to GCC of the HPS night shelter have not visited the night shelter on Glassford street, and several first ministers, although invited, have not attended. They are too busy according to their secretaries. “Politicians have become maniacs” (McInnes, 2025, 11:57), which for those who remember is something John Lennon said years ago (Lennon, 2017, 00:12-00:17). It can be argued that the lack of recognition of altruism of HPS by GCC is becoming apparent. The Scottish National Party led council (Rose and Shephard, 2016) who have held a majority in Glasgow from 2022 led by Susan Aitken (BBC, 2022) are the main ‘point of contact’ for HPS with GCC.

 

In that point, McInnes suggests that politicians have forgotten about the people of the country and are focusing on money, budgets and arguing in the parliament (McInnes, 2025, 12:09). Patrick Harvie (Scottish Parliament, 2021) visited the soup kitchen and was very uncomfortable with “dirty homeless people” (McInnes, 2025, 13:34-13:41). Susan Aitken (SNP) and Patrick Harvie of the Scottish Green Party (SGP) are both representing a democratically elected role by the people of Glasgow. The MCTCC is also elected with an a-political approach to representation (Elliott, Fejszes and Tàrrega, 2019), each representing their manifestos in the political realm and their constitution in the a-political realm. HPS is also representing an a-political realm with a constitution. The MCTCC and HPS should have in common the factors of community and be a frontline access to the citizens of Glasgow who need to communicate in order to participate the access to both entities as appropriate (Escobar, 2014).

 

Visiting the democratic and community morality of deontology and utilitarianism (Bassford, 2022), it’s conceivable to adjust the perception of right and wrong in thematic motions to a high density city dwelling thinking process (Festinger, 1962). A mechanism of self-proclaimed primordial instincts to elaborate the “fight or flight” of city dwelling. The deontology of being in the environment (Brooks and Agosta, 2024) and the need to build an invisible wall around the meaningful aspects that crystallise existence to the self is portrayed in the actions of visceral systems of authority. Invisible walls erected through policy and bureaucratic rule (Cullingworth, 2020) with a medium of democratic processes as the Machiavellian justification to enact authority on the citizen (Larkins, 2010). Tribalism in primordial bureaucratic authority being an instinctive survivor of self at the expense of others. Maintaining the belief of their being as a tribal entity and polishing it to the format of “council”, “political party”, “local authority” and asking the citizen to agree through “democracy” and “membership” tacitly ensuring the locked intergenerational perennial line that acts as a vehicle for enhancing the tribal primordial bureaucratic authority towards the citizen or organisation.

 

When asking what relationship GCC has with HPS, it is clear that service users of HPS are referred to HPS by GCC. However, HPS appear to be overwhelmed by food kitchen nightly service users 365 days a year, as the MCTCC try to close down the service (Hunter, 2024). The relationship appears confused and the local authority not transparent in its intentions as on one hand it is asking for help and on the other hand it is baiting the MCTCC by supplying meeting space for the MCTCC to enact such actions as closing the soup kitchen and night shelter they are referring people to. The dystopian entropy in decision making from the local authority may be one of the reasons Glasgow has the “Glasgow Effect” (Walsh et al., 2010). Enhancing the three elements of the five giants: Squalor, Hunger, and Ignorance (Klein, 1995). Squalor relating to homelessness managed by an over-stretched services that operates arms length digital and telephonic mediums, which lacks a face-to-face human connection in a time of crisis (Folkman, 2013; Glasgow City Council, 2024b).

 

Glasgow has a housing emergency declared in November 2023 putting pressure on homeless services (Glasgow City Council, 2024a). Homeless Project Scotland are one of the vents to cope with the over spill of the uncontrollable influx of homeless applications at GCC, providing a support package of first order needs (TRUMP, 1991) and targeting squalor and hunger. Allowing the citizen to function with basic human needs and stay within Scottish society, in a Scottish city that has historic neglect if it were not for the community helping community (Walsh et al., 2010). The disheartenment from the co-founder of HPS is evident when saying “the system is failing because the system does not care” (McInnes, 2025, 11:50). In essence, HPS operates more efficiently than GCC with homelessness in Glasgow; however, it finds the arena difficult as GCC through MCTCC has facilitated facilities for MCTCC to use - to pass a motion to close down HPS’s Glassford Street night shelter and soup kitchen.

 

The Simon Community and the Glasgow City Council Relationship

 

The Simon Community Scotland SC003076 is the charity and Company with the number SC137419 (SC) and are another homeless project that reaches various parts of Scotland (Simon Community Scotland SC003076 OSCR, 2024; SIMON Community Companies House, 1992). Focusing on SC Glasgow, they are open 365 days a year in Glasgow (McGrath, 2020) reports of Simon Community working with Glasgow Council and the Scottish Government over the pandemic years. Primarily mentioned is 23rd March 2020 when lockdown began. Helping 2,500 people with the assistance of the Simon Communities partners and volunteers over a four month period. The numbers of staff to help with the support is 221 staff from the Simon Community and partners and 164 volunteers who helped around 1,000 people off the streets who otherwise would not have been helped if the Simon Community and partners were not there. Served up 156,000 meals to support people who needed food. That equated to 385 people to help 2,500 between Glasgow and Edinburgh. The figures in 2024 SC trustee report 341 people are employed (SIMON Community Companies House, 1992). No exact Glasgow figures exist, the local authority GCC supports the Simon Community, a verification of acceptance shown by the reciprocal relationship between the two entities.

 

Partnership with Simon Community is invited through an open letter from Lorraine McGrath, CEO (2023), who asks for £200,000 in the letter aimed at Edinburgh, Glasgow, Lanarkshire and Perthshire, to cope with increasing demand on the Simon community services. In 2025 from a fundraiser started in 2023, £110,000 had been raised on Just Giving (A Safe Space, 2023). If quartered, that’s 27,500 for Glasgow Simon community who supports 500 people a week at their Argyle street premises. The accounts of the charity show 31st March 2025 that the income is £12,066,201 and the spent is £12,648,116 which leaves a £581,915 deficit and £281,130 carried forward from previous years. On all observable data from the Scottish Charity Regulator on the Simon Community accounts from year end 31st March 2025 (OSCR, 2026b; Simon Community Scotland, 2025). This leaves a deficit of £581,915 on 31st March 2025. The £200,000 fundraiser on Just Giving is for items for support required.

 

The Simon Community also boasts a stake in the services of Health and Social Care Practice (Glasgow City Health and Social Care Partnership, 2020) and is using its own reserves to work and fund in partnership the Access Hub with other entities with a similar goal. Showing a strong commitment to a partnership from the third sector group Glasgow City Mission (GCM) who again do similar work to HPS and SC. GCM and SC, however not including HPS, providing an Access Hub that opens a multi agency response. The response group includes Glasgow City Health and Social Care Partnership (HSCP), GCM, Marie Trust (MT) and Turning Point Scotland (TPS). Along with Simon Community Scotland (SCS). They are all part of the City Ambition Network which was created in 2015 to assist with the homeless situation in Glasgow (A Safe Space, 2023).

 

Out of 2,772 charities there are six that are focusing on homeless support and there are more micro third sector projects helping support with food and other essentials (Crawford and Dougall, 2019a). HPS is the new comer to the city with their services (HPS, OSCR, 2025) and proving difficult to enter the third sector homeless network in Glasgow through work already taking place without the HPS intervention. The relationship between HPS and GCC being fraught is a pivot for third sector organisations previously established to work more closely with GCC. Using an “ism” tribalism as a stay on loyalty in a primordial third sector within the Glasgow area (Collins, 2019). According to Mary Douglas’s Cultural Theory (Boreland, 2016) the four cultural streams are individualist, hierarchical, egalitarian, isolate. Each entity in the tribe corresponding to a method in the madness; in this case ‘city logic’ to produce outcome in working practices based on the cultural understanding of the connection between word, meaning and action. Tribalism with the hierarchical stream prompts anxiety and low esteem towards the others that parade on the same ground as the same guise and producing the same outcome. Disgust in the realism from the formation of boundaries set by the previous intake of intergenerational tribalism and now threatened in tribal terms by “new comers” in the new forming circle of thinkers and doers (Fisher et al., 2018). Emotions ruling logic and using brain width to interfere with the working memory (Baddeley, 2020; Semeraro, Vilella and Ruffo, 2021). Ipsative model of assessment (Frey and Heggli, 1989) helps to identify the learning curve and Mary Douglas model of cultural theory the dynamic tribal process towards an outcome. With sameness joining commonalities through related interests (Yang, Brennan and Wilkinson, 2016), local authority and third sector can be thematic. In the case between GCC and SC, a partnership operates and SC have an empathy to the GCC methodology of combating homelessness, one being the Access Hub that multi agency organisations, business and authority began in the pandemic lockdown (A Safe Space, 2023). GCC have funded SC to help it develop and have impactful social progress (Simons, McCrea and Warren, 2004) through cafe projects. This fits with the hub style approach that SC push out as a service. GCC achieve the factor of no homelessness on the streets of Glasgow and this helps the person in need a place of contact, warmth and shelter from the elements.

 

Glasgow City Mission and the Glasgow City Council Relationship

 

Glasgow City Mission SC001449 (GCM) is a charity based in Glasgow from 1932 (Glasgow City Mission SC001499, 2025). A Christian approach to assisting those in need, providing hot meals and sleeping accommodation. People are offered to interact with faith and belief to help them spiritually too.

 

Glasgow City Mission say “We offer multiple pathways to new life. We look at the whole person; addressing trauma and complex needs ensuring individuals can manage their emotional wellbeing.” David Harper, Rehab Pathways Manager. The GCM is “at the forefront of compassionate care for the city’s marginalised since 1826” (Glasgow City Mission, 2025). This is just shy of a quarter of Glasgow's existence, and in 2025 that is 198 years that the GCM has been open. The issue of homelessness and food poverty has created a need for a service from GCM to those in need over the 198 years. Giving a reflection of the issues in society over that time, with the same need for assistance in different centuries. The local authority changing some through the years, but the effect not affecting a change of circumstance for the citizens (Danson and Mooney, 2013). The GCM through Glasgow Social Care Partnership (HSCP) has a working partnership with GCC (Glasgow City Mission, 2024; Companies House, 2025) and in tandem have the access hub on Argyle street Glasgow, along with other groups such as the SC (A Safe Space, 2023).

 

The longevity of GCM shows that GCM is needed in the face of dystopian circumstances that ravage, in this case Scottish citizens that have low life chances, poor quality of life and early mortality (Walsh et al., 2010; MÜLLER, 2024; Pasino, 2016). For 198 years this situation of poverty and deprivation in Glasgow has happened. Out of poverty and deprivation awareness, services have evolved to produce care and compassion (Crawford and Dougall, 2019a) and the services that GCM provide are aimed towards care and compassion. The secular approach of faith and that faith bringing people out of their situation is the GCM approach. One way is through “the gathering” an interactive church service that has a lunch at 1pm then the gathering service at 2pm on a Thursday (Glasgow City Mission, 2025).

 

In 2025, GCM had an income of £1,619,246 and £1,250,000 was spent on staff costs which left £369,246 to run everything. That’s £7,101.65 each week after staff costs. The crisis is real according to GCM who also work with other agencies that do similar work during the day (OWC, 2024). The Over Night Welcome Centre has helped 1,091 over four months and if multiplied with four is 4,364 in the winter project and produced what GCM refer to as 4,810 presentations. The GCM calculate a lower success outcome for housing people to permanent housing. This is because of the housing emergency. Thirteen percent have no resource to public funds (NRPF) (OWC, 2024). It means we have elements of support systems not being activated until GCM activate the awareness of rights the individual should be receiving (OWC, 2024).

 

GCM has three different models to fulfil their aims and objectives: winter project, city centre project and family centre. Each is a haven for children and adults to have a safe space and it allows the GCM time to build trust through eating with people and conversing (Glasgow City Mission, 2025). Fifty staff and 200 volunteers help keep GCM going for seven days a week providing lunch and dinner, counselling services and assistance to access support services for people including shelter, childcare, finding jobs and training, warm place to sit and feel human. The cost of staff for the city centre project is £185,000 and the child and family centre is £140,000 in 2025 (OSCR, 2026c; Glasgow City Mission, 2025).

 

The Impact and Cost for Each Project

 

Homeless Project Scotland spend an average of £5,540.60 a week which is £791.51 a day providing a service for 33 people sleeping in the HPS night shelter supply 350 meals a night (McInnes, 2025, 13:22) which is an average of £2.26 for each person per day based on the latest HPS accounts (OSCR, 2026a).

 

Simon Community Glasgow costs £1,054,010 each month to operate and average of £34,510 a day to operate. The daily spend an average user for 500 people each week costs £0.99 a day on its service users. This equates to an average of £25,220 a year. The staff costs are for 385 staff £9,850,000 including pension contribution, and with the Chief Executive, Director of Finance and Corporate Support (Simon Community Scotland, 2025). The difference of share of finance between the homeless person and the SC employee is an average of £25,584.

 

Glasgow City Mission costs £2,280 each month to operate, its daily cost of £76 for 1,200 service users, 40 users a day average over seven days. The daily spend an average user is £1.90 for each person approximately. The staff costs are £1,250,000 and the city centre in Glasgow costs for staff being £185,000 and running £27,500 in 2025 (OSCR, 2026c).

 

According to recent figures from Glasgow’s health and social care partnership (HSCP) as of January 2026, there are 4,847 households in temporary accommodation, including 2,287 in unsuitable B&Bs or hotels. There are 7,121 homelessness applications this financial year (2025/26), with 3,520 from refugees, making up 44.5% of new demand (Glasgow Times, 2026). This reflects an ongoing increase, with an addition of 189 households since the previous update. While specific data on breaches, deaths, and refusals for late 2025 is not detailed, the trend indicates persistent pressure, similar to earlier 2025 reports where 1,095 breaches were noted from January to May, four deaths in temporary accommodation, and 456 refusals in April-May, with £4,177,731 spent on hotels/B&Bs in that month (Glasgow HSCP, 2025).

 

The relationship between the SC, Glasgow City Mission and Homeless Project Scotland is varied. The financial relationship between council and third sector service varies, Simon Community using the most money, then Glasgow City Mission and Homeless Project Scotland who works on very little money. The sums are staggering that are invested in homelessness. GCC has spent £4,177,731 in one month 1st April 2025 to 1st May 2025 (Glasgow HSCP, 2025). SC has no money for homeless people after core costs £12,648,116, the SC had to fundraise for £200,000 in which £110,000 was raised between four areas in Scotland. This left £27,500 for the year of service for homeless people in Glasgow (Simon Community Scotland, 2025). GCC and SC work together in a strong partnership, sharing information such as the rising numbers in temporary accommodation (Glasgow Times, 2026). The SC costs £12,648,116 and if the £4,177,731 is multiplied by 12 from GCC to show £50,132,772. If this number is added to £27,500 to show £50,160,272. Then take the updated numbers from recent reports: 4,847 households (approximately 8,000-10,000 people including children), 7,121 applications, 3,520 refugees, this indicates around 20,000-25,000 affected individuals based on similar ratios. For illustration, dividing £50,160,272 by 26,108 (adjusted for consistency) yields approximately £1,921.28 per person, or £5.26 daily.

 

This may show the reason the Glasgow Effect is rife and quality of life is poor (Walsh et al., 2010). Five people have died since 1st January 2025 till 1st May 2025 (Glasgow HSCP, 2025), with trends suggesting continued risks. Both GCC and SC are in full time flow. Showing that careers can be built on the homelessness science (Piliavin et al., 1993). Core staff who are being paid in a profession that’s a product of someone else’s despair. It could be argued that the relationship between SC and GCC is one of financial personal gain and the help from the SC helps guide GCC to perpetuate the intake of the services that SC provide. Making it a never-ending movement. This would bring a realism to the core staff costs (Mutiganda, 2013).

 

Conclusion

 

This critical analysis has highlighted the varying efficiencies of third sector homeless services in Glasgow, with Homeless Project Scotland demonstrating remarkable cost-effectiveness through its voluntary model and low daily per-person spend of £2.26 (OSCR, 2026a), contrasting with the larger-scale operations of Simon Community Scotland (£0.99 per user daily) and Glasgow City Mission (£1.90 per user daily), which incur higher staff and overhead costs (OSCR, 2026b; OSCR, 2026c). While SC and GCM maintain strong, reciprocal partnerships with Glasgow City Council (GCC), evidenced by shared initiatives like the Access Hub and funding support, HPS's relationship appears strained, marked by referrals without commensurate recognition or resources, culminating in enforcement actions via the MCTCC (Hunter, 2024). These dynamics underscore the "Glasgow Effect" (Walsh et al., 2010), where squalor, hunger, and ignorance persist despite significant investments—over £50 million annually from GCC and SC alone—yielding only £5.26 daily per affected person.

 

Ultimately, the third sector's efficiency hinges on balancing altruism with sustainable operations, yet systemic failures in GCC collaboration perpetuate cycles of dependency (Piliavin et al., 1993). For charities aiming to optimize impact, prioritizing volunteer-led models like HPS can reduce core costs, allowing more direct aid and ensuring no citizen is left behind.

 

Reference List

 

A Safe Space (2023) Just Giving. Simon Community. Available at: www.justgiving.com/campaign/asafeplace (Accessed: April 14, 2025).

 

Baddeley, A. (2020) “Working memory,” Memory, pp. 71–111. doi:10.4324/9780429449642-4.

 

Bassford, A.D. (2022) “Conscientious Utilitarianism; or, the Utilitarians Who Walk Away from Omelas.”

 

BBC (2022) SNP maintains position as largest party at Glasgow City Council, BBC. BBC. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-61347945 (Accessed: March 14, 2025).

 

Bennett, H. and Clegg, D. (no date) “Local report: Glasgow, United Kingdom.”

 

Blackden, S. (1979) “The Poor Law and Health: A Survey of Parochial Medical Aid in Glasgow, 1845–1900,” The Search for Wealth and Stability, pp. 243–262. doi:10.1007/978-1-349-03625-7_12.

 

Boreland, D.J. (2016) “Mary Douglas,” Pillars in the History of Biblical Interpretation, Volume 2: Prevailing Methods after 1980, p. 204.

 

Brooks, D. and Agosta, S. (2024) “Surviving the Anthropocene: A Darwinian Guide,” Global Perspectives, 5(1). doi:10.1525/gp.2024.115331.

 

Burns, A.P. (2020) Journeys through homelessness: an ethnographic investigation into the lived experiences of homelessness in Glasgow. University of Glasgow. doi:10.5525/gla.thesis.81869.

 

Checkland, S.G. (1964) “The British Industrial City as History: the Glasgow Case,” Urban Studies, 1(1), pp. 34–54. doi:10.1080/00420986420080031.

 

Clarke, A., Simpson, J. and Varese, F. (2019) “A systematic review of the clinical utility of the concept of self-disgust,” Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 26(1), pp. 110–134. doi:10.1002/cpp.2335.

 

Collins, B. and McKeown, K. (no date) “Referral and settlement in the Simon Community: a report of the study.”

 

Collins, T.E. (2019) The three cultures: towards a cultural understanding of a third sector organisation. University of Southampton.

 

Companies House (2020) Homeless Project Scotland Company number CS004656, Companies House. Crown copyright. Available at: https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/CS004656 (Accessed: May 2, 2025).

 

Companies House (2025) GLASGOW CITY MISSION Company number SC140322 Accounts for a small company made up to 30 June 2024, https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/SC140322/filing-history. Companies House. Available at: https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/SC140322/filing-history (Accessed: May 27, 2025).

 

Crawford, F. and Dougall, R. (2019b) “Supporting vulnerable people on Glasgow city centre streets: views of service providers.”

 

Crawford, F. and Dougall, R. (2019c) “Supporting vulnerable people on Glasgow city centre streets: views of service providers.”

 

Crawford, F. and Dougall, R. (2019d) “Supporting vulnerable people on Glasgow city centre streets: views of service providers.”

 

Crawford, F. and Dougall, R. (2019a) “Supporting vulnerable people on Glasgow city centre streets: views of service providers.”

 

Cullingworth, J. (2020) Democratic governance through intermediary bodies: a case study of third sector interfaces in Scotland. University of Glasgow. doi:10.5525/gla.thesis.81355.

 

Danson, M. and Mooney, G. (2013) “Glasgow: a tale of two cities?: disadvantage and exclusion on the European periphery,” in Unemployment and Social Exclusion. Routledge, pp. 217–234. doi:10.4324/9781315000251-10.

 

Davey, M. (1989) “The Housing Act 1988.” HeinOnline.

 

Duncan, T. (1990b) “Community councils in Glasgow-The development of an urban grassroots democracy,” Local Government Studies, 16(2), pp. 8–16. doi:10.1080/03003939008433513.

 

Duncan, T. (1990a) “Community councils in Glasgow-The development of an urban grassroots democracy,” Local Government Studies, 16(2), pp. 8–16. doi:10.1080/03003939008433513.

 

Elliott, I.C., Fejszes, V. and Tàrrega, M. (2019) “The Community Empowerment Act and localism under devolution in Scotland,” International Journal of Public Sector Management, 32(3), pp. 302–319. doi:10.1108/ijpsm-03-2018-0080.

 

Escobar, O. (2014) “Strengthening local democracy in Scotland: The community councils perspective,” in. Convention of Scottish Local Authorities.

 

Festinger, L. (1962) “Cognitive dissonance,” Scientific American, 207(4), pp. 93–106.

 

Fisher, M. et al. (2018) “The tribalism of truth,” Scientific American, 318(2), pp. 50–53.

 

Fitzpatrick, S. and Davies, L. (2021) “The ‘ideal’ homelessness law: balancing ‘rights centred’ and ‘professional-centred’ social policy,” Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 43(2), pp. 175–197. doi:10.1080/09649069.2021.1917712.

 

Folkman, S. (2013) “Stress, Coping, and Hope,” Psychological Aspects of Cancer, pp. 119–127. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-4866-2_8.

 

Frey, B.S. and Heggli, B. (1989) “An ipsative theory of business behaviour,” Journal of Economic Psychology, 10(1), pp. 1–20. doi:10.1016/0167-4870(89)90054-8.

 

Glasgow City Council (2024a) Glasgow’s Housing Emergency, www.glasgow.gov.uk. Glasgow City Council. Available at: https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/article/11508/Glasgow-s-housing-emergency (Accessed: March 29, 2025).

 

Glasgow City Council (2024b) Homeless or about to be, www.glasgow.gov.uk. Glasgow City Council. Available at: https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/article/11509/Homeless-or-about-to-be (Accessed: December 29, 2025).

 

Glasgow City Health and Social Care Partnership (2020) New Advice and Support Centre for Homeless People, https://glasgowcity.hscp.scot. Glasgow City Health and Social Care Partnership. Available at: https://glasgowcity.hscp.scot/news/new-advice-and-support-centre-homeless-people (Accessed: April 14, 2025).

 

Glasgow City Mission (2024) Where to turn. Available at: https://glasgow.gov.uk/article/5204/7-Where-to-turn (Accessed: April 25, 2025).

 

Glasgow City Mission (2025) Glasgow City Mission, Glasgow City Mission. Glasgow City Mission. Available at: https://www.glasgowcitymission.com (Accessed: April 25, 2025).

 

Glasgow City Mission Companies House (2025) Accounts for a small company made up to 30 June 2024, GLASGOW CITY MISSION Company number SC140322. Crown Copyright. Available at: https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/SC140322/filing-history (Accessed: April 30, 2025).

 

Glasgow City Mission SC001499 (2025) Glasgow City Mission, OSCR. OSCR. Available at: https://www.oscr.org.uk/about-charities/search-the-register/charity-details?number=SC001499 (Accessed: April 17, 2025).

 

Glasgow HSCP (2025) Request Under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2020, https://glasgowcity.hscp.scot. Glasgow HSCP. Available at: https://glasgowcity.hscp.scot/search?keys=20250603-FOI838274 (Accessed: October 10, 2025).

 

Glasgow Times (2026) Glasgow's homelessness crisis intensifies as latest figures revealed. Available at: https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/news/25797194.glasgows-homelessness-crisis-intensifies-latest-figures-revealed (Accessed: 29 January 2026).

 

HPS, OSCR (2025) Charity Details, https://www.oscr.org.uk/about-charities/search-the-register/charity-details?number=SC050207. Oscr. Available at: https://www.oscr.org.uk/about-charities/search-the-register/charity-details?number=SC050207 (Accessed: March 13, 2025).

 

Hunter, C. (2024) “More than 40k sign petition to keep Glasgow homeless shelter open,” Evening Times, 5 October. Available at: https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/news/24632343.40k-sign-petition-keep-glasgow-homeless-shelter-open/ (Accessed: March 21, 2025).

 

Karadzhov, D. et al. (2024) “Bridges to Belonging: Priorities for Supporting the Transition from Homelessness to Inclusive Communities in Scotland.” University of Strathclyde.

 

Klein, R. (1995) “The Five Giants: A Biography of the Welfare State,” BMJ, 311(7008), p. 818.

 

Krishna, A. (2003) “Partnerships between local governments and community-based organisations: exploring the scope for synergy,” Public Administration and Development, 23(4), pp. 361–371. doi:10.1002/pad.280.

 

Langenbacher, E. (2022) “CONCLUSION The Germans Must Have Done Something Right,” From the Bonn to the Berlin Republic, pp. 397–413. doi:10.1515/9780857458575-022.

 

Larkins, J. (2010) “Machiavelli, Territoriality, and Lo Stato,” From Hierarchy to Anarchy, pp. 123–144. doi:10.1057/9780230101555_7.

 

Lennon, J. (2017) John Lennon Said the World is Run By Insane People According To an Interview!, https://youtu.be/jWiLljmJbnk?si=hTnLMCp8ZlpVIEfS. Discosaturn. Available at: https://youtu.be/jWiLljmJbnk?si=hTnLMCp8ZlpVIEfS (Accessed: March 13, 2025).

 

Lund, B., Greener, I. and Powell, M. (2022) “The Beveridge report 80 years on: ‘Squalor’ and housing—‘A true goliath,’” Social Policy & Administration, 56(2), pp. 284–298. doi:10.1111/spol.12765.

 

Mc Grath, L. (2020) Silver lining of lockdown - over 2500 people helped by Simon Community Scotland, Perspective Communicators. Perspective Communicators. Available at: https://perceptivecommunicators.co.uk/news/the-impact-of-the-pandemic-has-meant-many-people-being-more-able-to-accept-our-support-and-importantly-been-able-to-find-new-ways-to-thrive (Accessed: April 1, 2025).

 

McBride, M. (2024) “Young people, place-based stigma and resistance: A case study of Glasgow’s East End,” The Sociological Review, 72(5), pp. 1097–1116. doi:10.1177/00380261241233915.

 

McInnes, C. (2025) The System “DOES NOT CARE” about the homeless- Homeless Project Founder, https://youtu.be/jlGdfbu1gv4?si=Z62ZoxkeiPqp4izH. Scotland Speaks with Alex Salmond. Available at: https://youtu.be/jlGdfbu1gv4?si=Z62ZoxkeiPqp4izH (Accessed: March 12, 2025).

 

McIntyre, Z. and McKee, K. (2008) “Governance and sustainability in Glasgow: connecting symbolic capital and housing consumption to regeneration,” Area, 40(4), pp. 481–490. doi:10.1111/j.1475-4762.2008.00814.x.

 

McKendrick, J.H. (2020) “Of a time and place: Glasgow and its quality of life geographies,” Space and Polity, 24(2), pp. 233–251. doi:10.1080/13562576.2020.1790351.

 

MCTCC (2024) Community Council Meeting, https://mctcc.scot/2024/09/17/meeting-minutes-27-august-2024/. Merchant City And Trongate Community Council. Available at: https://mctcc.scot/2024/09/17/meeting-minutes-27-august-2024/ (Accessed: March 13, 2025).

 

Mercer, M.J. (1985) Policy and provision for the single homeless in Glasgow and Boston. University of Glasgow (United Kingdom).

 

Miao, J.T. (2021) “Building the future city Glasgow,” Smart Cities for Technological and Social Innovation, pp. 247–264. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-818886-6.00013-7.

 

MILLIGAN, C. and FYFE, N.R. (2004) “Putting the Voluntary Sector in its Place: Geographical Perspectives on Voluntary Activity and Social Welfare in Glasgow,” Journal of Social Policy, 33(1), pp. 73–93. doi:10.1017/s0047279403007268.

 

MÜLLER, H.-P. (2024) “LIFE CHANCES AND STRUCTURAL INEQUALITY,” Glocalism: Journal of Culture, Politics and Innovation [Preprint]. doi:10.54103/gjcpi.2024.22749.

 

Mutiganda, J.C. (2013) “Budgetary governance and accountability in public sector organisations: An institutional and critical realism approach,” Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 24(7–8), pp. 518–531.

 

OWC (2024) Overnight Welcome Centre Report 2023/2024, https://www.glasgowcitymission.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/A4-2023-24-GCM-OWC-Report-digital.pdf. Glasgow City Mission. Available at: https://www.glasgowcitymission.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/A4-2023-24-GCM-OWC-Report-digital.pdf (Accessed: April 29, 2025).

 

Pasino, P. (2016) “Social and environmental determinants of quality of life: the case of Glasgow.”

 

Piliavin, I. et al. (1993) “The Duration of Homeless Careers: An Exploratory Study,” Social Service Review, 67(4), pp. 576–598. doi:10.1086/604012.

 

Project Scotland, H. (2020) Homeless Project, http://homelessprojectscotland.org.uk. Homeless Project Scotland. Available at: http://homelessprojectscotland.org.uk (Accessed: March 12, 2025).

 

Rose, R. and Shephard, M. (2016) “The Long and the Short of the SNP Breakthrough,” The British General Election of 2015, pp. 126–139. doi:10.1057/9781137366115_5.

 

Scottish Parliament (2021) Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs), https://www.parliament.scot/msps/current-and-previous-msps/patrick-harvie. The Scottish Parliament. Available at: https://www.parliament.scot/msps/current-and-previous-msps/patrick-harvie (Accessed: March 14, 2025).

 

Semeraro, A., Vilella, S. and Ruffo, G. (2021) “PyPlutchik: Visualising and comparing emotion-annotated corpora,” PLOS ONE, 16(9), p. e0256503. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0256503.

 

Simon Community (2023) CEO open letters to business, Simon Community. Lorraine McGrath. Available at: https://www.simonscotland.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/CEO-open-letter-Glasgow.pdf (Accessed: April 14, 2025).

 

SIMON Community Companies House (1992) Simon Community, Companies House. Crown Copyright. Available at: https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/SC137419 (Accessed: March 29, 2025).

 

Simon Community Scotland (2025) Annual Report and Accounts for the Year Ended 31st March 2025. Available at: https://www.simonscotland.org/report/simon-community-scotland-annual-report-and-accounts-for-the-year-ended-31st-march-2025 (Accessed: 29 January 2026).

 

Simon Community Scotland SC003076 OSCR (2024) Simon Community Scotland SC003076, OSCR. OSCR. Available at: https://www.oscr.org.uk/about-charities/search-the-register/charity-details?number=SC003076 (Accessed: December 29, 2025).

 

Simons, L., McCrea, D. and Warren, M. (2004) “Glasgow community caf’e development intervention: evaluation report.”

 

Tait, N. and Falcone, G. (2025) “Bringing MacKay up to date using geographic information systems: A case study for the city of Glasgow,” Sustainable Cities and Society, 119, p. 106075.

 

Third Sector (2024) Homelessness charity “shocked” after council tells it to stop using building, https://www.thirdsector.co.uk/homelessness-charity-shocked-council-tells-stop-using-building/management/article/1888093. Third sector. Available at: https://www.thirdsector.co.uk/homelessness-charity-shocked-council-tells-stop-using-building/management/article/1888093 (Accessed: March 14, 2025).

 

Traill, H. (2023) “Urban Growing in Glasgow,” The Practice of Collective Escape, pp. 18–30. doi:10.51952/9781529220711.ch002.

 

TRUMP, T.M. (1991) “Value Formation and Postmaterialism,” Comparative Political Studies, 24(3), pp. 365–390. doi:10.1177/0010414091024003005.

 

Walsh, D. et al. (2010) “Glasgow Effect,” Glasgow Centre for Population Health [Preprint].

 

Watts, B. et al. (2021) “The homelessness monitor: Scotland 2021,” Crisis Scotland [Preprint].

 

Werther, W.B. and Berman, E.M. (2001) Third sector management: The art of managing nonprofit organizations. Georgetown University Press.

 

Yang, Y., Brennan, I. and Wilkinson, M. (2016) “Value similarity: the key to building public trust in charitable organisations,” Voluntary Sector Review, 7(1), pp. 47–66. doi:10.1332/204080516x14555532383091.

 

OSCR (2026a) Charity Details: Homeless Project Scotland SC050207. Available at: https://www.oscr.org.uk/about-charities/search-the-register/charity-details?number=SC050207 (Accessed: 29 January 2026).

 

OSCR (2026b) Charity Details: Simon Community Scotland SC003076. Available at: https://www.oscr.org.uk/about-charities/search-the-register/charity-details?number=SC003076 (Accessed: 29 January 2026).

 

OSCR (2026c) Charity Details: Glasgow City Mission SC001499. Available at: https://www.oscr.org.uk/about-charities/search-the-register/charity-details?number=SC001499 (Accessed: 29 January 2026).