No recourse to public funds: a qualitative evidence synthesis

Purpose This study aims to outlines the findings of first qualitative evidence synthesis empirical research on impact No Recourse Public Funds (NRPF) rule which prevents most temporary migrants from accessing social security benefits in UK. Design/methodology/approach The review used 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses protocol guidelines. Data were analysed by using Thomas Harden’s (2008) thematic methodology. An initial 321 articles identified 13 databases, 38 studies met inclusion criteria. Findings key insights that NRPF causes destitution extreme poverty has a disproportionate racialised women. Studies found support services underdeveloped, underfunded, inconsistent had culture mistrust racism towards migrants. Migrants often fearful due concerns around deportation, state intervention children. Research limitations/implications focussed research. Future theoretical is needed following areas: as practice everyday bordering, role Home Office creating sustaining policy; differing gendered experiences NRPF; broader geographical scope includes all four UK nations takes an international comparative approach. Originality/value Despite estimated 1.4 million people with (Citizens Advice, 2020), there little policy or discussion experience having implications rule. lack analysis significant gap both our understanding landscape UK, ways immigration policies create poverty. To best authors’ knowledge, this paper systematic NRPF, bringing together how negatively affects outcomes migrants, local authority voluntary sector responses perspectives NRPF.