MOVE ON / evidence explorer

Public money · official records

How can this be allowed?

A fixed hotel price below full occupancy. More than six times the standard dispersal rate. No hotel service credits for specified failures.

The paper trail does not show a rogue invoice or a single bad decision. It shows a payment rule and an oversight gap that Parliament’s own committees put on the record.

Follow the paper trail Check your council

Strong Signal · official Home Office, NAO and parliamentary records

The paper trail ·

The contract made the expensive option safer for the provider.

The question is not whether hotels were ever necessary. It is why the contract could protect the supplier from empty-room risk while the public carried the cost—and why the enforcement trail was so weak.

Turn the national rule into a local question

What did your council receive, measure and decide?

Enter a postcode to see the published numbers attached to its local authority, with the source beside every figure.

The postcode is sent to postcodes.io only to return a council code. Do not enter a full address.

Then widen the lens

What else the numbers actually say

These measures are not one story and they are not person-level linkage. Each card tells you its grain, its source and its “so what”.

Research discipline

What the evidence did not show

The explorer keeps the refuted propositions visible. A finding is more useful when the test that could have killed it is shown beside it.

Read before sharing

Aggregate evidence, not a person-level pathway

Annual measures retain their reporting year. Suppressed cells are shown as unknown, never as zero. “NTS threshold exposure” is an annual comparison against the configured 0.1% threshold; it is not an operational transfer decision.