Key messages

• the framework centres dignity as a core principle in service delivery for people facing crisis
• person-centred care is emphasised, including psychosocial support and cash assistance to help maintain dignity
• collaborative, cross-sector working and community engagement are central to effective delivery
• training and practical tools for frontline staff are essential to applying dignity principles
• governments and organisations have a key role in reducing stigma and promoting inclusive, respectful services.

Policy implications

• service models may need to explicitly embed dignity as a core outcome
• workforce development should support frontline staff to apply dignity principles in practice
• collaboration across statutory, voluntary and community sectors may improve consistency of support
• organisational culture and leadership are likely to shape whether dignity-focused approaches are sustained.

Gaps

• limited intersectional research on experiences of specific subgroups
• lack of evidence on disabled or LGBTQI+ asylum seekers’ experiences of dignity in crisis support
• challenges in engaging marginalised populations continue to restrict the evidence base.

Commentary
This framework positions dignity as central to equitable service delivery, particularly for people experiencing crisis and marginalisation. By focusing on respect, person-centred care and psychosocial support, it highlights how inequities can be reinforced when services prioritise efficiency over lived experience.

The emphasis on collaboration and community engagement reflects an equity-led approach to care. Involving people and communities in planning and delivery can help services respond more effectively to diverse needs and reduce exclusion linked to stigma or misunderstanding.

Training for frontline staff is identified as a critical enabler of dignity in practice. Without adequate support and tools, principles of dignity risk remaining aspirational rather than embedded in everyday service delivery.

From a care equity perspective, the framework draws attention to the role of organisations and government in shaping inclusive systems. However, gaps in intersectional evidence limit understanding of how dignity is experienced by specific groups, underlining the need for further research to ensure dignity-focused approaches benefit those facing multiple forms of disadvantage.