Refugee Action, Victoria Charity Centre, 11 Belgrave Road, London SW1V 1RB
Tel 0207 952 1511 http://www.refugee-action.org.uk
Registered Charity number 283660
Company Registration number 1593454
OISC Authorisation Number N200100071
Refugee Action’s Choices Service
Post-Return Client Feedback Report
April 2014 - March 2015
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 2 of 33
CONTENTS
1 Introduction 3
2 Sustainable return 3
3 Client feedback 2014-2015 5
3.1 Headline issues highlighted by client feedback 5
3.2 Reports of safety issues 6
3.3 Problems at the return airport 8
3.4 Satisfaction with the service 9
3.5 Life in the country of return 11
3.6 Influence of friends and family 12
3.7 In employment or running a business 12
3.8 Re-migration 13
3.9 Internal relocation 13
3.10 Gender 14
4 Looking towards the future … 17
5 Appendix 20
5.1 Reports of safety issues 21
5.2 Problems at the return airport 22
5.3 Satisfaction with the service 23
5.4 Life in the country of return 25
5.5 Influence of friends and family 27
5.6 In employment or running a business 28
5.7 Re-migration 29
5.8 Internal relocation 29
5.9 Gender 30
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 3 of 33
1 Introduction
After over 10 years of providing advice to those considering returning
to their country, Refugee Action took on the UK’s Assisted Voluntary
Return programme in April 2011. Through non-directive, impartial and
confidential advice the Choices service enables people to consider all
options available to them, including voluntary return. This supportive
environment allows people to make their own, fully informed decision.
For those who decide to return to their country of origin, the Choices
service strives to support them to achieve a sustainable return.
Refugee Action gathers and collates data on the sustainability of return
and the quality of service received from Choices and its partner
organisations. The analysis of post-return feedback is essential to
highlight potential issues faced by returnees and ways to improve the
service.
This report looks at feedback given over the period of April 2014 to
March 2015, which was gathered through telephone contact and
recorded on the client database. Clients were contacted for feedback
two weeks after return and again after five months. It is important to
note that feedback numbers were limited in 2014/15, particularly at the
five months point. At two weeks 38% of returnees gave feedback and
at five months 8% (percentages are of the total number of returnees for
2014/15). This reflects difficulties related to lack of clarity about the
future of the Choices service.
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 4 of 33
2 Sustainable return
Refugee Action has developed the following working definition of
sustainable return in discussion with overseas partners:
“Sustainable return occurs when an individual (and their family):
a) are able to engage in income generation sufficient to meet the
accommodation and subsistence needs of their family,
b) have successfully re-established family and social ties and feel a
sense of belonging to the return community,
c) do not suffer persecution or violence as a result of the political or
security situation in the country of return,
d) do not need to re-migrate except where this is via safe regulated
migration routes.” 1
1Points a, c and d are based on the classification supplied by Black et al in
‘Understanding Voluntary Return’ (2004) published by the Home Office. Point b was
developed following feedback from the Choices overseas partners. Despite a person
having sufficient money, physical safety and accommodation they still may not feel like
they “belong” either because they have not developed social ties with family and
friends, or because they still feel a connection or sense of belonging to the UK. Point b
therefore values the impact of social capital, the value of social connections and
networks in experiencing a sustainable return.
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 5 of 33
3 Client feedback 2014/2015
3.1 Headline issues highlighted by client feedback
In 2014/15 there were reports of returnees’ concerns about their
personal safety in the following main countries of return:
Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Iran, Iraq-Kurdistan, Pakistan and Sri
Lanka.
Returnees to Pakistan, Sri Lanka and India were often stopped at
the airport of return by immigration officials, in many cases
demanding bribes. In 2014/15 a high number of returnees to Iran
also told us they had been questioned and detained on arrival at
the airport (46%).
Levels of satisfaction with Refugee Action’s Choices service
were very high across all countries. After 2 weeks 100% of
returnees giving feedback were happy with all or parts of the
service; after 5 months 99%. Only two out of a total of 525 clients
we spoke to after their return were unhappy with the service.
The majority of returnees (71%) told us that life in the country of
return was better or the same as expected at the two weeks
feedback point. After five months returnees were slightly less
positive about their lives, with 35% telling us that life was worse
than expected compared to 29% after two weeks.
Family and friends provided accommodation and/or financial
support to returnees in the majority of cases shortly after their
return. 67% relied at least partly on their financial support and 65%
initially stayed with friends and family. After five months these
figures were lower, with 38% being supported financially and 49%
sharing accommodation. In some countries such as India or China
a high percentage of clients lived with friends and family after five
months, but a smaller proportion received financial assistance from
friends and family.
Levels of being either in employment or involved in a business
were at an average of 50% for all countries at the five months
point. Returnees to India (67%) and Sri Lanka (63%) appear to
have been more successful than the total average in securing
employment or having their own business, but it is difficult to make
assumptions on the basis of the low overall feedback numbers.
After two weeks 15% of returnees told us about plans to re-
migrate. After five month the percentage was 32%, but feedback
numbers were considerably lower, so it is difficult to confirm this as
a trend. Clients with plans to re-migrate are often also concerned
about their personal safety, e.g. in countries such as Iran, Iraq-
Kurdistan and Sri Lanka.
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 6 of 33
3.2 Reports of safety issues
An important element of sustainable return is that the returnee does
not suffer persecution or violence as a result of the political or security
situation in the country of return. While those who report concerns
about their safety may not be harmed, their fears may affect their
chances of psycho-social reintegration and ability to settle back into
networks of family and friends.
Returnees’ concerns for personal safety are significantly higher in
certain countries of return. In 2014/15 Bangladesh, Iran, Iraq-
Kurdistan, Pakistan and Sri Lanka were amongst the countries
where returnees were the most concerned about their personal safety.
Compared to the previous year an increasing number of returnees to
Iraq-Kurdistan said they were worried about their personal safety after
two weeks (29% compared to 12%), which reflects the deteriorating
political and security situation in Iraq particularly during the summer of
2014, when IS took control over parts of Iraq close to the Kurdistan
Region.
Some clients spoke about fears related to the reason why they had left
the country initially or claimed asylum in the UK. Others referred to
family disputes and issues within the community or were concerned
about general security issues, political unrest and war.
Some examples of reported safety issues in countries of return:
Bangladesh political reasons, crime levels and threats from
relatives
India political reasons, problems with people in the
community
Iran clients told us about being investigated by
authorities
Iraq-Kurdistan fear of IS, other terrorist groups and a possible
war
Pakistan general security situation, family disputes,
political and religious differences, mistrust in
judiciary
Sri Lanka fear of being monitored, worries about outcome
of presidential elections and the general
security situation
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 7 of 33
3.2.1 Two week feedback
After two weeks 17% of returnees expressed concerns for their
personal safety.
Percentage of clients afraid for personal safety after two weeks (countries with 7 or more answers recorded):
“Every day I have to go to a different office for some investigation also they told me I can’t go outside this town and they forbid me to access internet I am like prisoner here I am not safe here.” 2
(see also appendix 5.1.1)
2 2 weeks feedback Iran
3.2.2 Five months feedback
After five months 24% of returnees expressed concerns about their
personal safety. Bangladesh (50%), Pakistan (26%) and Sri Lanka
(38%) saw the highest proportion of returnees with safety concerns,
but it has to be noted that the overall feedback numbers were very low.
“Client said that the political situation is very difficult. He said that he has no freedom of movement and he feels that he has been observed all the time.” 3
Family is safe but client said that people come up to him some times and say that if you come into our neighbourhood we will do this and that to you.” 4
(see also appendix 5.1.2)
3 5 months feedback Bangladesh
4 5 months feedback India
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 8 of 33
3.3 Problems at the return airport
Problems at the airport can occur in any country of return, but they are
most pronounced in a small number of countries.
While some issues with the return journey are concerned with logistics
(e.g. lost luggage or missed connections), some Choices returnees are
also detained, have to undergo long periods of questioning and/or are
pressured to pay a bribe. 82 out of a total of 468 returnees (18%) who
provided feedback on their return journey between April 2014 and
March 2015 reported problems on arrival at the airport.
21 (4%) had to pay a bribe in order to be able to leave the airport, with
an average of £96 paid per returnee, although the amount varied
between countries. 36 (8%) were detained and questioned for up to 4
hours and a further 7 (1%) for more than 4 hours.
Countries where problems at the return airport occurred most regularly
were India (15%), Iran (46%), Pakistan (30%) and Sri Lanka (40%).
A large number of returnees to these countries also reported problems
in previous years.
In some cases, detention and questioning of a returnee at the return
airport may be specific to the individual (for instance if they were a
member of the opposition party or had left the country without a valid
visa). In others, questioning appears to be the result of immigration
officials being faced with travel documents they are not familiar with,
such as EU letters and Emergency Travel Documents (ETDs).
Travelling without a passport appears to increase the likelihood of
scrutiny at the border in several countries.
“Client stated that the journey was fine, but held for two hours by immigration authorities at the airport of arrival in India. He said he was questioned because of his ETD. He said he was questioned why he was in the UK. He was then released after two hours.” 5
In some countries immigration officials routinely demand bribes before
they release returnees. The occurrence of these situations is
particularly high in Pakistan (17%) and Sri Lanka (12%). Those bribed
in Pakistan reported paying on average the equivalent of £73. In Sri
Lanka the average was even higher at £140. This indicates difficulties
with any cash payment system on departure (as opposed to accessing
reintegration support in-country).
“He was told to pay some money and that he would be taken out of the airport with no issues. He gave some money but then he was taken halfway only and asked to pay some more money. Altogether it was £90.” 6
(see also appendix 5.2)
5 2 weeks feedback India
6 2 weeks feedback Sri Lanka
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 9 of 33
3.4 Satisfaction with the service
3.4.1 Two week feedback
In order to successfully reintegrate, returnees need to prepare for and
plan their return, taking into account the situation in the country of
return. The Choices service helps clients to make logistical
arrangements and provides support to access financial assistance as
well as other guidance throughout the return process.
Feedback two weeks after return shows that 91% of returnees were
happy with all parts of the service they received from Choices. A
further 9% were happy with parts. Only 1 out of a total of 441 returnees
who provided feedback was unhappy with the service. Unfortunately
there is no further information available on the reasons for their
negative feedback. In Iran, where positive feedback was significantly
lower, this related to country-specific difficulties in accessing their
reintegration payments.
“Choices staff were very supportive. When there was a delay with my travel document and it looked like I might be homeless they were calling every day, trying to help me with my accommodation and trying to sort things out at the embassy.” 7
The following table compares the satisfaction with the service after two
weeks in countries with more than 20 answers to the question:
7 2 weeks feedback South Africa
COUNTRY % happy with
all parts of the service
% happy with parts of the
service
% unhappy with the service
China 100% 0% 0%
Iraq - Kurdistan 95% 5% 0%
India 94% 5% 2%
Pakistan 94% 6% 0%
Sri Lanka 94% 6% 0%
Iran 80% 20% 0%
All countries 91% 9% 0%
3.4.2 Five months feedback
Feedback numbers were relatively low for the five months point. All 84
clients except one who had expected more support from the overseas
partner told us they were happy with all or parts of the service.
“The client said he was very happy with the Choices service as it has
helped him reunite with his family. He said he received very good help
from Refugee Action. Client said that there were no improvements he
would recommend to the service as Choices helps people return with
"dignity and respect". “ 8
8 5 months feedback Pakistan
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 10 of 33
3.4.3 Reasons why returnees are unhappy, or only happy with
parts of the Choices service
It is evident from client feedback that unhappiness with the service was
often related to difficulties in accessing reintegration assistance due to
the documentation required for payment or the time it took for money
transfers. Some returnees also stated that the level of financial support
was not enough.
Other issues identified in client feedback were related to travel
arrangements such as flights or excess baggage and problems
Emergency Travel Documents had caused at the return airport.
The qualitative feedback provided around unhappiness with the service
therefore appears to be an expression of the frustrations returnees feel
when it comes to practicalities and economic problems faced upon
return, rather than a comment on the advice received.
(see also appendix 5.3)
“Client pointed out that she will struggle to get receipt and invoices in advance to claim the remaining money. She said she has no money except the money she got at Heathrow.” 9
“ETD - passport would be better - cause problems.” 10
“Client said that the money doesn't come through fast enough. He said it is too slow at coming through. It needs to be improved.” 11
9 2 week feedback Pakistan
10 2 week feedback India
11 5 months feedback Malawi
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 11 of 33
3.5 Life in the country of return
Asking returnees about their experience of life in the country of return
gives an indication of how well their expectations have been met. By
looking at feedback from major countries of return it is possible to
establish where returnees were more successful in starting a new life
and where they had difficulties. Feedback is not only based on their
experiences upon return, but also expectations they might have had
pre-return. It must also be noted that the same returnees do not
necessarily provide feedback at both points.
Overall feedback on life in the country of return is less positive five
months after return. While at the 2 weeks feedback point 71% said that
life was better or the same as expected, only 65% felt this way after
being in the country for several months. However, for some countries
feedback numbers at the five months point are very low.
Countries with high percentages of returnees reporting life as worse
than expected at the five month stage are: Bangladesh (50%), Iran
(50%), Pakistan (43%), and Sri Lanka (63%).
The only two countries with an increase in perceptions that life was
better or the same as expected are China and Zimbabwe. However,
we only have three answers at the five months point from Zimbabwe.
(see also appendix 5.4)
COUNTRY
2 weeks 5 months * change *
% better or same as expected
out of a total of answers recorded
% better or same as expected
out of a total of answers recorded
Bangladesh 75% (15) 20 50% (3) 6 25% reduction
China 70% (21) 30 71% (5) 7 1% increase
India 84% (57) 68 76% (13) 17 7% reduction
Iran 52% (12) 23 50% (2) 4 2% reduction
Nigeria 87% (13) 15 33% (1) 3 53% reduction
Pakistan 68% (45) 66 57% (13) 23 12% reduction
Sri Lanka 88% (43) 49 38% (3) 8 50% reduction
Zimbabwe 78% (14) 18 100% (3) 3 22% increase
All countries 71% (331) 466 65% (62) 95 6% reduction
*5 months trends should be treated with caution as feedback numbers are low.
“It’s okay, all the family have managed to settle back in now. All the children are enrolled into school. They are beginning to enjoy it now.” 12
“Life is no good in Pakistan. Security situation is not good. The person with money and power is secure in Pakistan. I rented the shop, started grocery business, someone looted my shop. I am single and no one takes care.” 13
12
5 months feedback Pakistan 13
5 months feedback Pakistan
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 12 of 33
3.6 Influence of friends and family
Family and friends play a vital part in the reintegration of many
returnees. Their role is not limited to psycho-social support and the re-
establishment of social networks. They are also central to returnees’
ability to generate income, find a place to live, and survive when times
are difficult.
At the two weeks feedback point Sri Lanka (86%), Brazil (86%),
Nigeria (75%) and India (74%) had the highest levels of dependency
on friends and family in terms of financial support. A similarly high
percentage was dependent on friends and family for accommodation in
these countries except for Nigeria (44%). (see also appendix 5.5)
If return is sustainable, one would expect that support from friends and
family decreases over time. However, after five months the number of
Bangladeshi clients who received financial support from friends and
family increased from 55% to 67%, and the percentage of returnees
accommodated by friends and family remained at 50 percent.
In other countries reintegration appears to be more successful, with
fewer returnees requiring financial support after five months, e.g. 22%
in India and 38% in Sri Lanka. However, the majority of clients in both
countries continued to live with friends and family (India 65%, Sri
Lanka 57%), which may reflect the family structures in both countries.
3.7 In employment or running a business
The ability to generate enough income to support themselves and their
families is a vital element of sustainable reintegration. Post-return
feedback shows that this varies significantly from country to country.
While returnees appeared to be doing well in India and Pakistan (67%
were in employment or running their own business in India and 52% in
Pakistan), only one of the 6 returnees to Bangladesh had started a
business at the five months feedback point. (see also appendix 5.6)
There is also a difference in method of income generation depending
on the country. More returnees decided to start their own business
than seek employment in India (50% compared to 17%) and Pakistan
(39% compared to 13%). It is however unclear if this was due to a lack
of job opportunities.
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 13 of 33
3.8 Re-migration
An intention to re-migrate implies that a return was not sustainable.
Re-migration contradicts ‘sustainable return’ unless it is done through
safe and legal migration routes. When analysing feedback it is not
possible to determine this, because returnees have not yet acted upon
these intentions. Those who reported plans to re-migrate are
presumed to have found problems in reintegrating following return,
which may be due to issues such as the inability to generate sufficient
income, establish social networks, or concerns about personal safety.
The countries showing the highest remigration intention rates after two
weeks are Iran (20%), Iraq-Kurdistan (33%) and Sri Lanka (21%).
Although only 10% of clients who returned to Bangladesh had plans to
re-migrate after two weeks, 4 out of 6 clients providing feedback after 5
months wanted to move to another country. In 2013-14 there had also
been a noticeable increase in clients who wanted to leave Bangladesh
five months after return.
In some countries reasons for remigration may relate to concerns
about safety, or lack of employment opportunities specific to returnees
(e.g. in Iraq Kurdistan). In others it should be noted that remittances
form a significant proportion of the GDP, for example in 2010 they
constituted 12% of Bangladesh’s GDP, with the government identifying
remittances as a key growth area. 14 (see also appendix 5.7)
“Client said that he is thinking to re-migrate because there is less opportunity for people who return from abroad to find employment and he is thinking to leave in the next 2-3 months.” 15
3.9 Internal relocation
In addition to re-migration, some returnees had plans to re-locate
within the country of return. This may have a range of reasons – in
some cases safety concerns, in others better job opportunities and/or
living conditions.
At two weeks 15% of returnees intended to re-locate, with the highest
percentage in Iran (28%) and Pakistan (25%). After five months this
reduced to 7% overall and to 9% in the case of Pakistan. This may
indicate that after 5 months people generally felt more settled, or had
moved to the area in which they intended to stay.
(see also appendix 5.8)
14
The World Bank (2011) Migration and Remittances Factbook 2011, 2nd
edition, available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTLAC/Resources/Factbook2011-Ebook.pdf
15 2 weeks feedback Iraq-Kurdistan
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 14 of 33
3.10 Gender
It is important to examine whether men and women experience return
differently. Please note that only the gender of main applicants is taken
into account in the analysis below; adults travelling as part of a family
unit do not appear in the feedback statistics.
In many countries the number of female main applicants is very low,
making it impossible to draw reliable conclusions from the feedback.
China, India, Nigeria, Pakistan and Zimbabwe have sufficient numbers
of female returnees who provided feedback after two weeks to
evaluate whether there are significant gender differences. However,
due to low overall numbers at the five months feedback point an
analysis of any change occurring over time is difficult.
3.10.1 Personal safety
Overall, similar percentages of men and women raised concerns for
their personal safety (14% of men and 17% of women at 2 weeks, and
21% of men and 19% of women at 5 months). However, there are
differences in some countries.
In Pakistan 42% of female returnees had safety concerns after two
weeks, compared to 27% of male clients. This may reflect the position
of women in Pakistan, making female returnees feel more vulnerable.
Many female clients spoke about family disputes and their fear of
relatives.
“She has serious concern about her safety from her in-laws. She presently lives in her friend’s house which is far away from her in-laws and safe as well.” 16
Female clients also report problems with their relatives in other
countries, e.g. in Malawi.
3.10.2 Problems at the airport
Similar to personal safety concerns there is no significant difference
between male and female main applicants experiencing problems at
the airport (18% of women and 20% of men).
3.10.3 Satisfaction with the Choices service
At the two weeks feedback point there is very little difference between
male and female feedback on the Choices service. At the five months
feedback point more men than women were unhappy with an element
of the service. However, the total number of answers obtained for this
question after five months is significantly lower than at the two weeks
feedback point.
16
2 weeks feedback Pakistan
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 15 of 33
Satisfaction with the service
2 weeks 5 months
female male female male
Happy with all parts of the service
105 88% 302 91% 15 94% 55 81%
Happy with parts of the service
15 12% 29 9% 1 6% 12 18%
Unhappy with all parts of the service
0 0% 1 <1% 0 0% 1 1%
Total 120 332 16 68
3.10.4 Life in country of return
It is difficult to draw gender-specific conclusions from the data around
whether expectations of life in the country of return have been met. In
many countries, the statistics suggest no obvious difference. However
there are exceptions in some countries.
After two weeks men were more satisfied with their lives than women
in Bangladesh (81% compared to 50%), India (86% compared to 72%)
and Sri Lanka (89% compared to 66%), whereas men were less happy
than women in China (60% compared to 90%) and Zimbabwe (63%
compared to 90%). Overall a higher percentage of men than women
said that life was worse than expected at the 5 months feedback point,
but in China it was 25% of men compared to 33% of women. However,
feedback numbers were very low.
It appears that women felt better about their lives after 5 months than
when they first arrived, while men were less satisfied.
Life in country of return
2 weeks 5 months
female male female male
Life is better than expected
32 25% 80 23% 4 19% 13 18%
Life is the same as expected
61 47% 167 48% 13 62% 32 43%
Life is worse than expected
36 28% 101 29% 4 19% 29 39%
Total answers 129 348 21
74
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 16 of 33
better 23%
the same 48%
worse 29%
better 25%
the same 47%
worse 28%
better 18%
the same 43%
worse 39%
better 19%
the same 62%
worse 19%
Perception of life in country of return after two weeks:
FEMALE MALE
Perception of life in country of return after five months:
FEMALE MALE
3.10.5 Employment and business set up
At two weeks more men than women managed to set up businesses or
find employment on return - 13% of men compared to 9% of women.
After 5 months 55% of women had a business or a job compared to
49% of men. However, feedback numbers are very low and therefore it
is not possible to draw any conclusions from these percentages.
In employment or in business
2 WEEKS 5 MONTHS *
female male Total
answers female male
Total answers
Afghanistan n/a 8% 13
Bangladesh 25% 6% 20 17% 6
Brazil 0% 10% 14 50% n/a 2
China 10% 10% 31 100% 25% 6
India 10% 13% 65 0% 71% 18
Iran 67% 26% 26 50% 4
Iraq - Kurdistan 0% 18% 39 50% 2
Nigeria 10% 17% 16 50% 0% 3
Pakistan 5% 19% 72 75% 47% 23
Sri Lanka 0% 2% 43
63% 8
Grand Total 9% 13% 463 55% 49% 94
*5 months trends should be treated with caution as feedback numbers are low for most countries
“Client has found a job, feels a lot happier now that she is working and also is feeling more settled.” 17
17
5 months feedback Malaysia
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 17 of 33
3.10.6 Re-migration
Male returnees appear to be more likely to plan re-migration then
female returnees. Only 9% of women said that they were considering
re-migration compared to 18% of men at the two weeks feedback
point. Those countries where women were considering re-migration
were: India (1), Iran (2), Jamaica (1), Mauritius (2), Nigeria (1),
Pakistan (2), Sri Lanka (1) and Zimbabwe (1).
At the five month point, 25% of women and 33% of men were intending
to re-migrate. Those countries where women said that they were
considering re-migration were: China (2), Namibia (1), Nigeria (1) and
Zimbabwe (1).
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 18 of 33
4 Looking towards the future …
The current funding for the Choices service is due to cease on the 31st
December 2015. The Home Office has announced that from the 1st
January 2016 it is planning to deliver a service in-house. It will not
include any funded impartial, pre-decision advice to help people
choose between their options. At least initially, it is also unlikely that
people will receive post-return support apart from cash payments.
Without impartial advice to help them with their decision-making people
are more likely to return to their country without having fully explored
how they might build a sustainable future or manage risks they might
face upon return.
People who return with cash but without broader reintegration support
are more likely to use their reintegration assistance to cover immediate
needs (such as giving it to family members) rather than considering
longer-term and more sustainable uses.
The lack of support from organisations in-country can lead to increased
vulnerability. Returnees are more likely to become internally displaced
or re-migrate, they are more likely to face security threats or
persecution and they are less likely to be able to generate an income.
In addition to the need for independent, confidential advice both pre
and post-return, several policy and practice recommendations emerge
from this feedback. We encourage the Home Office to adopt these into
its new model.
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 19 of 33
Policy and Practice recommendations:
1. Travel documents – all returnees should be given the time and
financial assistance to apply for passports rather than ETDs/ EU
letters where they are eligible for one. This appears to reduce
problems at the airport of return, and may assist with reintegration
and freedom of movement once in the country (for example with
registration for healthcare, education, movement through
checkpoints etc.).
2. Flight arrival times – flights should be timed to arrive during the
day wherever possible, to reduce instances of bribery and risks in
travelling from airports to town.
3. Method of reintegration support – this should not be an entirely
cash based system but should follow Refugee Action’s ‘Direct
Access’ model, to reduce the delays and evidencing difficulties
inherent in a receipts based system. Overseas partners should be
procured to support returnees to build a sustainable life for
themselves, including localised advice on sustainable options for
reintegration expenditure.
4. Withdrawal of cash support – before withdrawing cash support
people should be advised about:
The likelihood of bribery by immigration officials on arrival
Whether they will be able to withdraw their money in their
country and area of return
Any charges or limits associated with the withdrawal of cash
which will reduce the level of financial support they can
access
5. Friends and family should receive financial support when people
return to enable them, where appropriate, to support returnees in
their initial months.
6. Reintegration categories should be broadened to enable the
purchasing of furniture, household items, bills and house
extensions.
7. Gender analysis – AVR should be analysed from a gender
perspective e.g. single women should be granted support under
AVRIM vulnerability criteria when returning to certain countries.
8. Monitoring – returnees should be monitored post-return and
information collated to enable an assessment of sustainability
(based on RA’s definition). Information on risks, safety concerns
and other challenges should be given to those considering return.
9. Explore and prepare models should be developed to enable
returnees to assess the sustainability of return and take steps to
increase it for example by arranging accommodation, employment
and business development in advance of return.
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 20 of 33
5 Appendix
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 21 of 33
5.1 Reports of safety issues
5.1.1 After 2 weeks
CLIENTS REPORTING SAFETY CONCERNS - 2 weeks feedback
Country % of
clients
> 15 answers recorded
Details given
Afghanistan 21% no general safety concerns; client perceived as being wealthy after a long time in the UK
Angola 33% no
Bahrain 100% no political reasons
Bangladesh 36% yes political reasons, crime levels and threats from relatives
Bolivia 33% no no security and high crime levels
Cameroon 33% no political reasons; cannot return to home town
China 3% yes general anxiety
Ecuador 100% no no safety due to political conflict
Gambia 100% no problems with people in the community
Ghana 14% no scared of going out
India 1% yes no further details
Iran 28% yes many clients reported being investigated by authorities and having to report on a regular basis; one client spoke about family issues
Iraq - Kurdistan 29% yes general fear of IS, other terrorist groups and a possible war
Malawi 50% no in hiding due to family issues
Mauritius 14% no
Mexico 100% no threatened, but police did not help
Nigeria 6% yes no further details
Pakistan 36% yes worries about general security situation, but also a high number of family disputes has been reported
South Africa 10% no client perceived as being wealthy after a long time in the UK
Sri Lanka 14% yes fears of being monitored; some were worried about the outcome of the general elections
Turkey 50% no feeling pressurised by some terrorist groups
Ukraine 100% no general security situation and war
USA 50% no
Zimbabwe 6% yes client is keeping a low profile, is not going out
5.1.1 After 5 months
CLIENTS REPORTING SAFETY CONCERNS - 5 months feedback
Country % of clients
> 15 answers recorded
Details given
Bangladesh 50% no worries about the general political situation and mistrust in the police
China 17% no problems with money lenders
India 17% yes problems with people in the community; one client moved away due to political problems
Iran 25% no client is not allowed to leave the area
Malawi 33% no family problems
Malaysia 50% no safety concerns due to their religion
Namibia 100% no
Nigeria 33% no worries about general unstable situation
Pakistan 26% yes family problems, disputes over political and religious differences, mistrust in judiciary and general security situation
Sri Lanka 38% no scared of monitoring by authorities and general security situation
Uganda 100% no
Zimbabwe 33% no client is trying to keep a low profile
It is important to note that in those countries with small numbers of returns the
percentage of those reporting safety issues may appear very large; whilst there may
be a real risk to personal safety to individuals, given that small number it is difficult to
draw conclusions regarding the true prevalence of the problem.
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 22 of 33
5.2 Problems at the return airport
CLIENTS REPORTING PROBLEMS AT THE AIRPORT
Country
% clients Problems
at COR airport
> 15 answers recorded
Further details given
Albania 20% no client was questioned because he did not have a passport
Brazil 6% yes client was questioned because she did not have a passport
Cameroon 67% no one client had to pay £100 before she was let go, both were questioned about their passport (1 expired, 1 without visa)
India 15% yes 3 clients reported problems because of their ETD; 1 client was asked for money but refused to pay
Iran 46% yes
1 client was detained for three days and only released when his family got a solicitor;
2 passports were confiscated and 1 stamped to stop clients from leaving the country;
some clients said that they had to regularly report at the authorities
Iraq - Kurdistan 10% yes minor problems, i.e. being questioned, and two clients reported that their TDs were photocopied
Jamaica 17% no client was questioned for 30 minutes because of her expired visa
Kenya 50% no client was questioned because he did not have a passport
Malaysia 33% no client was questioned because of his passport
Mexico 100% no client was held for more than one hour for questioning
Mongolia 17% no issue with EU letter and immigration officers not being familiar with the document
Nigeria 6% yes client refused to pay a bribe, but saw another traveller paying £40
Pakistan 30% yes 12 people had to pay a bribe to leave the airport, paying between £20 and £200; one client told us that he paid £1,500
South Africa 10% no issue with ETD and immigration officers not being familiar with the document
Sri Lanka 40% yes
clients were questioned why they stayed in the UK and if they had applied for asylum;
clients were also asked for bribes, but were let go if they said they did not have any money; those who gave a bribe paid from £10 up to £200, with one
client’s family paying £400 to immigration officials before the clients arrival
Ukraine 50% no client was detained for 8 days because of his ETD and they kept all his documents when he was released
USA 50% no no further details
Vietnam 33% no client was asked lots of questions
Zimbabwe 11% yes one client had to pay a bribe and one was questioned because of their ETD
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 23 of 33
5.3 Satisfaction with the service
COUNTRY 2 WEEKS 5 MONTHS
Happy with all parts of service
% Happy with all parts of service
Happy with
parts of the
service
% Happy with
parts of the
service
Unhappy with the service
% Unhappy with the service
Total answers recorded
Happy with all parts of service
% Happy with all parts of service
Happy with
parts of the
service
% Happy with
parts of the
service
Unhappy with the service
% Unhappy with the service
Total answers recorded
Afghanistan 12 86% 2 14% 0 0% 14
Albania 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 3 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2
Algeria 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 3 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1
Angola 2 67% 1 33% 0 0% 3
Bahrain 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
Bangladesh 17 89% 2 11% 0 0% 19 3 75% 1 25% 0 0% 4
Bolivia 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 3
Brazil 14 100% 0 0% 0 0% 14 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2
Cameroon 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 3
China 27 100% 0 0% 0 0% 27 5 83% 1 17% 0 0% 6
Columbia 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
Congo DRC 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
Ecuador 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
Ethiopia 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1
Gambia 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 2
Georgia 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2
Ghana 6 86% 1 14% 0 0% 7 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 2
Guyana 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
India 61 94% 3 5% 1 2% 65 17 94% 1 6% 0 0% 18
Iran 20 80% 5 20% 0 0% 25 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 3
Iraq - Kurdistan 37 95% 2 5% 0 0% 39 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
Ivory Coast 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
Jamaica 4 80% 1 20% 0 0% 5
Kenya 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2
Libya 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 24 of 33
COUNTRY 2 WEEKS 5 MONTHS
Happy with all parts of service
% Happy with all parts of service
Happy with
parts of the
service
% Happy with
parts of the
service
Unhappy with the service
% Unhappy with the service
Total answers recorded
Happy with all parts of service
% Happy with all parts of service
Happy with
parts of the
service
% Happy with
parts of the
service
Unhappy with the service
% Unhappy with the service
Total answers recorded
Malawi 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 2 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 3
Malaysia 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2
Mauritius 6 100% 0 0% 0 0% 6 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
Mexico 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
Mongolia 3 60% 2 40% 0 0% 5 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
Morocco 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1
Myanmar 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2
Namibia 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2
Nepal 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2
New Zealand 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
Nigeria 13 87% 2 13% 0 0% 15 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 2
Pakistan 61 94% 4 6% 0 0% 65 18 78% 5 22% 0 0% 23
Philippines 5 100% 0 0% 0 0% 5 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
Senegal 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
South Africa 8 89% 1 11% 0 0% 9 1 50% 0 0% 1 50% 2
Sri Lanka 45 94% 3 6% 0 0% 48 6 100% 0 0% 0 0% 6
Tajikistan 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
Tunisia 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 3
Turkey 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
Uganda 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2
Ukraine 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 2
USA 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
Vietnam 2 67% 1 33% 0 0% 3
Zimbabwe 13 81% 3 19% 0 0% 16 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 2
All countries 401 91% 39 9% 1 0% 441 70 83% 13 15% 1 1% 84
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 25 of 33
5.4 Life in the country of return
COUNTRY 2 WEEKS 5 MONTHS
better than expected
same as expected
worse than expected
Total answers recorded
better than expected
same as expected
worse than expected
Total answers recorded
Afghanistan 3 21% 6 43% 5 36% 14
Albania 1 20% 3 60% 1 20% 5 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 2
Algeria 2 50% 1 25% 1 25% 4 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1
Bangladesh 4 20% 11 55% 5 25% 20 1 17% 2 33% 3 50% 6
Brazil 6 40% 7 47% 2 13% 15 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 2
China 3 10% 18 60% 9 30% 30 1 14% 4 57% 2 29% 7
Ghana 1 13% 4 50% 3 38% 8 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 2
India 21 31% 36 53% 11 16% 68 4 24% 9 53% 4 24% 17
Iran 3 13% 9 39% 11 48% 23 0 0% 2 50% 2 50% 4
Iraq - Kurdistan 6 15% 13 33% 21 53% 40 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1
Jamaica 1 17% 4 67% 1 17% 6
Mauritius 1 13% 2 25% 5 63% 8 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 2
Mongolia 1 17% 3 50% 2 33% 6 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
Nepal 0 0% 2 50% 2 50% 4
Nigeria 2 13% 11 73% 2 13% 15 0 0% 1 33% 2 67% 3
Pakistan 8 12% 37 56% 21 32% 66 3 13% 10 43% 10 43% 23
Philippines 3 75% 0 0% 1 25% 4 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1
South Africa 1 10% 4 40% 5 50% 10 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 2
Sri Lanka 21 43% 22 45% 6 12% 49 3 38% 0 0% 5 63% 8
Zimbabwe 4 22% 10 56% 4 22% 18 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 3
All countries 111 24% 220 47% 135 29% 466 17 18% 45 47% 33 35% 95
Please note that this table only includes countries where four or more clients answered the question at the two weeks feedback point and that feedback numbers at five months are considerably lower
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 26 of 33
2 weeks feedback on life in country of return for countries with 10 or more answers:
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Afghanistan Bangladesh Brazil China India Iran Iraq -Kurdistan
Nigeria Pakistan South Africa Sri Lanka Zimbabwe
better than expected same as expected worse than expected
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 27 of 33
5.5 Influence of friends and family
2 WEEKS 5 MONTHS
COUNTRY
% of clients receiving financial
support from friends and/or
family
% of clients staying with
friends and/or family
% of clients receiving financial
support and staying with
friends and/or family
Total answers recorded
% of clients receiving financial
support from friends and/or
family
% of clients staying with
friends and/or family
accommodation and support
from family/friends
Total answers recorded
Afghanistan 62% 71% 50% 14
Albania 0% 60% 0% 5 100% 50% 50% 2
Algeria 50% 75% 50% 4 100% 100% 100% 1
Bangladesh 55% 50% 40% 20 67% 50% 33% 6
Brazil 86% 73% 67% 15 50% 0% 0% 2
China 61% 63% 41% 32 33% 83% 33% 6
Ghana 75% 57% 43% 7 100% 100% 100% 2
India 74% 71% 55% 66 22% 65% 17% 18
Iran 62% 59% 56% 27 25% 0% 0% 4
Iraq - Kurdistan 51% 58% 35% 40 50% 50% 0% 2
Jamaica 100% 100% 67% 6
Mauritius 71% 25% 13% 8 50% 50% 0% 2
Mongolia 75% 83% 33% 6 0% 100% 0% 1
Nigeria 75% 44% 44% 16 100% 33% 33% 3
Pakistan 67% 73% 53% 73 35% 43% 22% 23
South Africa 78% 50% 40% 10 0% 0% 0% 2
Sri Lanka 86% 76% 65% 49 38% 57% 25% 8
Zimbabwe 61% 67% 56% 18 33% 33% 33% 3
All countries 67% 65% 49% 483 38% 49% 22% 94
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 28 of 33
5.6 In employment or running a business
COUNTRY IN EMPLOYMENT
RUNNING OR PART OF A BUSINESS
TOTAL ANSWERS RECORDED % IN EMPLOYMENT OR RUNNING
A BUSINESS
2 weeks 5 months 2 weeks 5 months 2 weeks 5 months 2 weeks 5 months
Afghanistan 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 13 8%
Algeria 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4* 1* 0% 0%
Bangladesh 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (10%) 1 (17%) 20 6* 10% 17%
Brazil 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 14 2* 7% 50%
China 1 (3%) 2 (33%) 2 (6%) 1 (17%) 31 6* 9% 50%
Ghana 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8* 2* 0% 0%
India 1 (2%) 3 (17%) 7 (11%) 9 (50%) 65 18 13% 67%
Iraq-Kurdistan 1 (3%) 1 (50%) 6 (15%) 0 (0%) 39 2* 18% 50%
Jamaica 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4* 0%
Malawi 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 2* 1* 0% 100%
Mauritius 1 (14%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 7* 2* 14% 50%
Mongolia 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 4* 1* 25% 100%
Nigeria 1 (6%) 1 (33%) 1 (6%) 0 (0%) 16 3* 12% 33%
Pakistan 1 (1%) 3 (13%) 10 (14%) 9 (39%) 72 23 15% 52%
South Africa 0 (0%) 2 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 9* 2* 0% 100%
Sri Lanka 0 (0%) 3 (38%) 1 (2%) 2 (25%) 43 8 2% 63%
Uganda 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 0 (0%) 2* 1* 50% 0%
Zimbabwe 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 18 3* 0% 33%
All countries 14 (3%) 19 (20%) 41 (9%) 28 (30%) 463 94 11% 50%
*Trends should be treated with caution as feedback numbers are low.
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 29 of 33
5.7 Re-migration
COUNTRY 2 WEEKS 5 MONTHS *
Plans to re-
migrate %
Total answers recorded
Plans to re-
migrate %
Total answers recorded
Bangladesh 2 10% 20 4 67% 6
Brazil 1 8% 12 0 0% 2
China 3 12% 25 3 43% 7
India 10 16% 64 4 22% 18
Iran 5 20% 25 1 25% 4
Iraq – Kurdistan 13 33% 39 0 0% 1
Nigeria 2 13% 15 2 67% 3
Pakistan 8 13% 63 5 22% 23
South Africa 0 0% 10 1 50% 2
Sri Lanka 10 21% 47 3 38% 8
Zimbabwe 2 11% 18 1 33% 3
All countries 67 15% 445 30 32% 95
*5 months trends should be treated with caution as feedback numbers are low for most countries
5.8 Internal relocation
COUNTRY 2 WEEKS 5 MONTHS *
Plans to internally relocate
% Total
answers recorded
Plans to internally relocate
Total answers recorded
Bangladesh 4 20% 20 0 0% 6
Brazil 1 8% 12 0 0% 2
China 5 20% 25 0 0% 7
India 5 8% 64 3 17% 18
Iran 7 28% 25 0 0% 4
Iraq – Kurdistan
4 10% 39 0 0% 1
Nigeria 0 0% 15 0 0% 3
Pakistan 16 25% 63 2 9% 23
South Africa
1 10% 10 0 0% 2
Sri Lanka 7 15% 47 0 0% 8
Zimbabwe 2 11% 18 1 33% 3
All countries
65 15% 445 7 7% 95
* 5 months trends should be treated with caution as feedback numbers are low for most countries
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 30 of 33
5.9 Gender
5.9.1 Concerns for personal safety by country
After 2 weeks:
COUNTRY YES NO TOTAL ANSWERS RECORDED
Female Male Female Male Female Male
Number % Number % Number % Number % Number Number Total
Bangladesh 1 20% 6 35% 4 80% 11 65% 5 17 22
Brazil 0 0% 0 0% 4 100% 11 100% 4 11 15
China 1 10% 2 10% 9 90% 19 90% 10 21 31
India 0 0% 1 2% 11 100% 56 98% 11 57 68
Iraq - Kurdistan 0 0% 7 18% 1 100% 31 82% 1 38 39
Nigeria 0 0% 1 17% 10 100% 5 83% 10 6 16
Pakistan 8 42% 13 27% 11 58% 36 73% 19 49 68
South Africa 1 13% 0 0% 7 88% 2 100% 8 2 10
Sri Lanka 0 0% 5 11% 3 100% 42 89% 3 47 50
Zimbabwe 0 0% 0 0% 9 100% 8 100% 9 8 17
Grand Total 22 5% 49 10% 109 23% 297 62% 131 346 477
After 5 months:
COUNTRY YES NO TOTAL ANSWERS RECORDED
Female Male Female Male Female Male
Number % Number % Number % Number % Number Number Total
Bangladesh 3 50% 3 50% 6 6
Brazil 0 0% 2 100% 2 2
China 0 0% 1 33% 3 100% 2 67% 3 3 6
India 0 0% 2 12% 1 100% 15 88% 1 17 18
Iraq - Kurdistan 0 0% 1 100% 1 1
Nigeria 1 50% 0 0% 1 50% 1 100% 2 1 3
Pakistan 1 25% 4 22% 3 75% 14 78% 4 18 22
South Africa 0 0% 2 100% 2 2
Sri Lanka 3 38% 5 63% 8 8
Zimbabwe 0 0% 1 100% 2 100% 0 0% 2 1 3
Grand Total 4 4% 15 16% 17 18% 58 62% 21 73 94
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 31 of 33
5.9.2 Problems at the airport by country
YES NO TOTAL ANSWERS RECORDED
COUNTRY Female Male Female Male Female Male
Number % Number % Number % Number % Number Number Total
Bangladesh 0 0% 13 100% 13 13
Brazil 0 0% 1 6% 5 100% 16 94% 5 17 22
China 0 0% 4 33% 4 100% 8 67% 4 12 16
India 1 10% 0 0% 9 90% 21 100% 10 21 31
Iran 0 0% 12 21% 10 100% 45 79% 10 57 67
Iraq - Kurdistan 2 100% 8 35% 0 0% 15 65% 2 23 25
Nigeria 0 0% 2 5% 1 100% 36 95% 1 38 39
Pakistan 1 10% 1 17% 9 90% 5 83% 10 6 16
South Africa 6 30% 20 38% 14 70% 33 62% 20 53 73
Sri Lanka 2 25% 0 0% 6 75% 2 100% 8 2 10
Zimbabwe 1 33% 14 30% 2 67% 32 70% 3 46 49
Grand Total 23 18% 70 20% 107 82% 278 80% 130 348 478
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 32 of 33
5.9.3 Life in country of return by country
After 2 weeks:
COUNTRY BETTER THAN EXPECTED SAME AS EXPECTED WORSE THAN EXPECTED TOTAL ANSWERS
Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Total
No % No % No % No % No % No % No No
Bangladesh 0 0% 4 25% 2 50% 9 56% 2 50% 3 19% 4 16 20
Brazil 3 75% 3 27% 0 0% 7 64% 1 25% 1 9% 4 11 15
China 2 20% 1 5% 7 70% 11 55% 1 10% 8 40% 10 20 30
India 4 36% 18 31% 4 36% 32 55% 3 27% 8 14% 11 58 69
Iran 0 0% 3 14% 1 33% 9 41% 2 67% 10 45% 3 22 25
Iraq - Kurdistan 0 0% 6 15% 1 100% 12 30% 0 0% 22 55% 1 40 41
Nigeria 2 22% 0 0% 5 56% 6 100% 2 22% 0 0% 9 6 15
Pakistan 2 11% 6 12% 11 58% 30 59% 6 32% 15 29% 19 51 70
Sri Lanka 1 33% 19 41% 1 33% 22 48% 1 33% 5 11% 3 46 49
Zimbabwe 3 30% 1 13% 6 60% 4 50% 1 10% 3 38% 10 8 18
Grand Total 32 25% 80 23% 61 47% 167 48% 36 28% 101 29% 129 348 477
After 5 months:
COUNTRY BETTER THAN EXPECTED SAME AS EXPECTED WORSE THAN EXPECTED TOTAL ANSWERS
Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Total
No % No % No % No % No % No % No No
Bangladesh 1 17% 2 33% 3 50% 6 6
China 0 0% 1 25% 2 67% 2 50% 1 33% 1 25% 3 4 7
India 0 0% 4 25% 0 0% 9 56% 1 100% 3 19% 1 16 17
Nigeria 0 0% 0% 1 50% 0% 1 50% 1 100% 2 1 3
Pakistan 0 0% 3 16% 4 100% 6 32% 0 0% 10 53% 4 19 23
Sri Lanka 3 38% 0% 5 63% 8 8
Zimbabwe 0 0% 0% 2 100% 1 100% 0 0% 0% 2 1 3
Grand Total 4 19% 13 18% 13 62% 32 43% 4 19% 29 39% 21 74 95
Post-return client feedback April 2014 – March 2015 Page 33 of 33
5.9.4 Intention to re-migrate by country
After 2 weeks:
COUNTRY RELOCATION WITHIN THE COUNTRY REMIGRATION TOTAL ANSWERS RECORDED
Female Male Female Male Female Male Total
Number % Number % Number % Number %
Bangladesh 2 50% 2 13% 0 0% 2 13% 4 16 20
China 2 22% 3 18% 0 0% 3 18% 9 17 26
India 1 9% 4 7% 1 9% 9 17% 11 54 65
Iran 1 33% 6 25% 2 67% 4 17% 3 24 27
Pakistan 9 50% 9 18% 2 11% 8 16% 18 49 67
Sri Lanka 1 33% 6 14% 1 33% 9 20% 3 44 47
Zimbabwe 1 10% 1 13% 1 10% 1 13% 10 8 18
Grand Total 24 19% 43 13% 11 9% 60 18% 124 332 456
After 5 months:
COUNTRY RELOCATION WITHIN THE COUNTRY REMIGRATION TOTAL ANSWERS RECORDED
Female Male Female Male Female Male Total
Number % Number % Number % Number %
Bangladesh 0 0% 4 67%
6 6
China 0 0% 0 0% 2 67% 1 25% 3 4 7
India 1 100% 2 12% 0 0% 4 24% 1 17 18
Iran 0 0% 1 25%
4 4
Pakistan 1 25% 4 21% 0 0% 5 26% 4 19 23
Sri Lanka 0 0% 3 38% 8 8
Zimbabwe 1 50% 0 0% 1 50% 0 0% 2 1 3
Grand Total 4 20% 7 9% 5 25% 25 33% 20 75 95