Understanding the experiences of receiving the Five Family Payments
In June 2022, NatCen carried out a survey with members of its Opinion Panel on behalf of End Furniture Poverty to understand how many people in the UK were unable to afford essential household items. The findings informed the ‘The Extent of Furniture Poverty in the UK’ report, published in 2023.
Building on this research, in September 2025, End Furniture Poverty commissioned NatCen to repeat and expand the study. The new research aimed to reassess the prevalence of furniture poverty to establish a robust baseline for future trend analysis. Additionally, it explored the impact that living in furniture poverty had on both mental and physical health. A new report was published by End Furniture Poverty in March 2026.
Together, these studies provide an important and robust evidence base that reveals the extent of furniture poverty and its impact on day-to-day life for people living without essential household items.
This survey examines severe conditions faced by disadvantaged or seldom‑heard groups. As with any survey, there’s always a degree of uncertainty in the results – essentially a plus/minus around each estimate. In this case, the uncertainty around the estimate (technically called ‘confidence interval’) is relatively wide. The smaller the group of interest, the harder it is to produce precise figures.
Confidence intervals are presented below for the key findings. For all other figures, we present the central estimate to keep things straightforward for readers.
There are certain groups more at risk of furniture poverty than others:
Social renters are far more likely to report that furniture poverty has an extremely or very negative impact on their health than other tenure types:
When we compare the findings over time, there is no clear evidence of a change in the overall levels of furniture poverty.
Looking at the central estimates:
The difference between the two surveys (4.8 million adults in 2022 vs. 4.0 million in 2025) sits well within the normal margin of error, so we can’t say conditions have improved or worsened. The difference is only “apparent”, due to normal survey variation. The data suggests that levels of furniture poverty have not changed.
The number of adults in furniture poverty and the number of missing essential items moved in opposite directions. This may – potentially – signal that hardship is becoming more concentrated, with a smaller group experiencing deeper deprivation. However, it could just as easily be the result of normal survey variation. More research is needed to test whether this “opposite fluctuation” is simply sampling noise or an early warning sign of a worsening situation for some groups. Additional data will help clarify what’s driving these patterns and whether they reflect real change or statistical ebb and flow.
It’s also worth stressing that two data points don’t make a trend. To understand whether things are getting better, worse, or staying the same, more measurements over time are needed to separate natural statistical noise from real movement in the numbers.
Fieldwork for this study was conducted using the NatCen Opinion Panel – a random-probability panel of people recruited from high-quality, random probability studies such as the British Social Attitudes survey. By using a probability-based sample, and allowing those without internet access to take part, this design reduces the risk of bias compared to online-only surveys which exclude those who do not have access to, or are less confident using, the internet or surveys using convenience samples which are more likely to include people who are more ‘available’ or particularly want to express their views.
The survey began by asking respondents if their household had each of the following 11 essential items: dining table and chairs; flooring; freezer; clothing storage (wardrobe or drawers); curtains or blinds; sofa or easy chairs; a place in a bed for each child (up to 17 years old); washing machine; cooker or oven; a bed for an adult; and fridge.
Respondents were considered to be in furniture poverty if they said they needed one of these items, but could not afford or otherwise obtain it. Respondents living in furniture poverty were then asked the mental and physical impact of missing an essential item.
The data was collected between 20th November and 14th December 2025 using a sequential mixed mode design (web and telephone). A total of 2,551 of the 4,429 panel members invited to take part did so, giving a survey response rate of 58%. The data were weighted to be representative of the UK adult (18+) population.
Receive a regular update, sent directly to your inbox, with a summary of our current events, research, blogs and comment.
Subscribe