Spotlighting the work of our Independent Modern Slavery Advocates

In the UK, our team of Independent Modern Slavery Advocates® (IMSAs®) work alongside adult survivors of modern slavery and human trafficking in their recovery.

But their role is complex, spanning legal and social frameworks as well as providing a tailored, trauma-informed approach for each survivor. There is no ‘typical’ working day.

In this blog, we showcase some of the types of work carried out by this dedicated team of professionals. Their work has been described by clients as “life-changing.”

As one survivor put it:

Currently, Hope for Justice has a small team of IMSAs, each working on a caseload of between 13-15 clients (survivors). We are also piloting this model of advocacy across the UK, with the view to giving all adult survivors access to an IMSA. You can find out more here: Independent Modern Slavery Advocacy: The IMSA Model

Survivors of modern slavery have been subjected to all kinds of horrific situations which impact them in different ways. Exploitation can leave victims facing huge gaps in their education or employment. In most cases they are isolated from their families or safe networks. They may have undergone periods of homelessness or destitution. In the UK, if a survivor feels able to report their exploitation, they must still then provide evidence to ‘prove’ they are victim. Exploitation can leave survivors with physical injuries and mental trauma, including life-limiting mental health problems. These effects can be life-long, requiring interventions and advocacy that go far beyond the support that is available through the UK Government.

Each survivor has multiple advocacy needs and each requires a tailored approach.

This is why IMSAs are so necessary. IMSAs are accredited professionals who can be a single point of contact for survivors. They work with and on behalf of survivors in a trauma-informed way. They recognise every individual is impacted in different ways by their exploitation and will have unique needs and aspirations for what they want for their lives moving forward.

Every day looks different. IMSAs speak to survivors/clients and to other professionals, they write advocacy letters, attend multi-agency meetings, research specific laws, find and make referrals to solicitors. Sometimes several crises come up at once; things can change quickly.

At Hope for Justice, IMSAs join a daily team call with the IMSA Model Hub Manager, when they ask for help from others if needed and share knowledge. For example, they might ask for the team’s input on a case that involves advocating for a Local Authority to accept housing duties for a survivor under the Housing Act 1996.

IMSAs often contact other organisations and partners involved in a survivor’s recovery, such as GPs, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA), National Referral Mechanism (NRM) support workers, local authorities, or police. They may need to book a doctor’s appointment for a client with poor mental health, or contact a GP to request evidence for a client’s CICA application, for instance.

To give some further examples, IMSAs might attend a multi-disciplinary Child in Need meeting in relation to a client’s case, ensuring that the survivor’s needs and wishes (as a parent) are articulated and understood. They may call a client to work through an application for Universal Credit. Or they may email a legal adviser to ask the likelihood of a successful challenge to a client’s negative decision on their CICA compensation claim. An IMSA might contact a college to ask if they will accept a client on an English language course. Or submit a referral to a specialist counselling service for a client.

Importantly, IMSAs are advocating for the rights and entitlements of survivors of modern slavery – ensuring that they have access to and can navigate the complex systems and services available to them in their recovery.

IMSAs are often required to write formal letters to the Home Office, local authorities, Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) and other decision-making bodies as they advocate for the legal rights and entitlements of survivors.

Here’s an example from one IMSA, Mitchel:

This morning, I opened an email from a local authority to learn that one of my clients, Roan* – a male survivor of forced labour** – had been refused homelessness assistance. This meant he couldn’t access emergency accommodation. The local authority had refused to provide Roan with accommodation on the basis that he wasn’t considered ‘priority need’. I contacted the survivor and explained the situation, informing him of the options. He asked me to write to the council on his behalf to ask for a reconsideration. Roan has minimal English language skills and we have repeatedly advocated for the local authority to provide an interpreter.

I began the letter with an introduction to Hope for Justice and what we do, outlining my role as an IMSA and how we are supporting Roan. Next, I researched the relevant legislation and guidance to inform my request. I also contacted Shelter’s professional advice line to discuss my intention to advocate for the decision to be overturned. We talked about the legislation that defined ‘priority need’ and how I could best advocate for the local authority to accept their duty to provide Roan with interim accommodation. Within the letter, I highlighted different sections of the Housing Act and Homelessness Reduction Act, applying each part of the legislation to Roan’s circumstances. I explained why the local authority were incorrect in refusing to provide assistance and challenged their decision. We explained why they had a duty to provide housing to this survivor and explained how they should meet that duty. I had previously sent about five emails as well as speaking to them on the phone.

We also requested ‘interim accommodation pending review’ – this would mean Roan could access housing whilst the local authority reviewed their decision. I also began to contact housing solicitors to enquire whether they had the capacity to take on the case should the local authority continue to decline assistance.

Now we just have to wait for their response, which could take some time. We’ve arranged Roan a short-term stay at a hotel as it was critical that he had a bed for the night. I’ll call him in the morning to check how he is, give an update and to reassure him we’re doing all we can to resolve this.

*Name and image changed to protect the identity of the survivor

**This example is an amalgamation of more than one case to ensure the anonymity of the survivor(s) involved

Our team is often contacted by survivors and professionals to provide independent advocacy on singular, specific areas of concern. These cases are overseen by our Advocacy Advice Co-ordinator, Alexandra. Here she shares how she advocated for Amal*, a mother who was forced into sexual exploitation by an ex-partner.

This complex case involved many professionals, including child services. Here we focus on one multi-agency meeting. Alexandra said: “This survivor had very little trust in professionals as they had previously failed to believe her. She felt no one understood. She had been treated poorly, with a real lack of concern. I have been working alongside her to help her grow in confidence.”

To prepare, Alexandra explained who would attend and what to expect. She asked Amal if there were any questions she wanted to ask and anything she specifically wanted to communicate. During the meeting, Alexandra ensured a trauma-informed approach – taking breaks, speaking clearly, intervening if Amal felt stressed or anxious and making sure Amal’s voice was heard by reiterating her input to the professionals.

Alexandra said: “Over time, this survivor has been able to re-model for herself what a trauma-informed meeting looks like and advocate for that herself. It has been a long process but shows the importance of an IMSA believing and valuing her.”

*Name and image changed to protect identity of the survivor

Our Advice and Intervention IMSA, Maddie, explains how she advocated for a male survivor of human trafficking to be formally recognised as a victim in the UK. When Christopher* was first referred to the National Referral Mechanism (NRM) – the system the UK uses to identify and support victims of trafficking – the Home Office decided there was insufficient evidence to believe he was a victim and so gave him what it calls a ‘negative reasonable grounds decision’.

Maddie said: “We spoke over the phone and I explained what the negative decision meant and why it had been given. Christopher was still experiencing a lot of trauma and he was clearly deeply affected by the decision, so I left space for him to process and talk. It was another setback; someone else had refused to believe him. This was another reason for him to distrust the authorities. I reassured him that it can be common for the Home Office to issue a negative decision and for us to have to challenge these. I explained that if Christopher wanted to access support from the Government, he would need to submit more evidence. To do that, I’d need to ask more questions about his exploitation, in a trauma-informed way, so we could demonstrate why he should be considered as a victim of modern slavery.”

Christopher decided to submit a reconsideration request and courageously shared about his exploitation. He had been promised a good job in a kitchen but was deceived and forced to work long hours for very little pay in a takeaway. His account had to be communicated in a way that would meet the requirements, showing how it evidenced modern slavery and human trafficking, and giving detailed timelines where possible.

There was a two-week deadline for challenging the decision, during which time the IMSA gathered supporting evidence from professionals, and drafted a letter to the Home Office outlining why the decision should be reconsidered, presenting new evidence, and raising relevant policy concerns (e.g. citing the Modern Slavery statutory guidance and showing why this hadn’t been followed). We also liaised with Christopher and relevant professionals, including the police (the dedicated First Responder organisation who had made the initial NRM referral), to ensure the reconsideration provided as much relevant information as possible before submitting it to the Home Office.

In 2025, 79% of initial negative reasonable grounds decisions were overturned when reconsidered.

*Name changed to protect identity of the survivor

This is an anonymised real case about a young adult female survivor who was sent to prison for crimes she was forced to commit by her traffickers. Drita* was born in Albania but moved to the UK with her father when she was young. After her father died unexpectedly, a man pretended to befriend her and moved into her home. The perpetrator then began using Drita’s flat as a base for drug dealing (know as ‘cuckooing’). A few years later, Drita was arrested and convicted of drugs charges.

Elle, our Child Trafficking Transition Specialist (CTTS) within our UK-based IMSA® team, works specifically with young adults. Elle visited Drita in prison.

Drita was a victim of child criminal exploitation – she was forced to carry and sell drugs – and is now facing potential deportation. Under current policy, anyone who receives a custodial sentence of four years or more will automatically receive a deportation notice, even when the offence is directly connected to their exploitation. This creates additional fear and uncertainty for survivors.

Elle is working to ensure that Drita’s convictions, which are clearly linked to her exploitation, are challenged so they cannot be used as a basis for removing her from the UK.

She wrote this reflection: “My role is to make sure survivors understand what is happening in their case and what options are available to them. Drita has received complex legal paperwork, including documents linked to deportation, and it’s easy for young people in her position to feel overwhelmed or confused by the process. A significant part of my work is helping her to navigate the system, stay informed, and stay engaged with professionals who can support her. Survivors in custody often feel isolated, so having consistent guidance and clear information is essential.”

Elle recently convened a meeting with key professionals involved in Drita’s case, bringing together the immigration solicitor, support workers, and criminal solicitor to agree the next steps.

You can read about our UK IMSA pilot here: https://hopeforjustice.org/imsa/

To financially support our work, including the rollout of the IMSA model, visit www.hopeforjustice.org/donate