Trinity

‘Hard to Reach’ was Never the Problem, We Were

This piece challenges a phrase deeply embedded in public service language: “hard to reach.” Drawing on doctoral research into the relationship between police and adults with learning difficulties in South Wales, it argues that the label quietly shifts blame onto the people being failed, rather than onto the institutions failing to reach them.

The research found that people labelled “hard to reach” weren’t disengaged by choice – they had learned, through repeated bad experiences, that the systems asking for their trust hadn’t earned it. They had views, opinions, and a genuine desire to be heard; what they lacked was a safe, consistent way to be heard. Where good practice existed, it relied on individual staff going beyond what their institution required – which the piece argues isn’t a sustainable model.

The piece connects this directly to Trinity’s own work with people in temporary accommodation and navigating homelessness, who are often labelled in similar terms. Its core argument: when organisations design services with genuine dignity, consistency, and time, people do engage. The barrier was never the person – it was a system that expected them to do all the reaching.