PAPER B3

Purpose: for Decision

REPORT TO THE CABINET

Date: 17 JANUARY 2006

Title: Housing Services - Policy Commission Blue Paper

REPORT OF THE Cabinet member for Care, health and Housing

IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 27 January 2006

SUMMARY/PURPOSE

1. To receive the Blue Paper on Housing Services from the Policy Commission for Care, Health and Housing

BACKGROUND

2. To examine the options for the structure of the Council’s Housing Services department. This includes staff working within Housing Needs, Housing Renewal, Housing Development, Occupational therapy and Pan Regeneration.

STRATEGIC CONTEXT

3. These recommendations have been made in light of the Council’s commitment to the integration of health and social care on the Island, the importance of the Housing within the context of the Healthier Communities agenda and the need for the Council to provide Value for Money.

CONSULTATION

4. Contained within the Blue Paper

FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPLICATIONS

5. Contained within the Blue Paper

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

6. Contained within the Blue Paper

OPTIONS

7. To accept all the recommendations

8. To accept some of the recommendations

9. To reject all of the recommendations

10. To reject all of the recommendations and refer the issue back to the Policy Commission for Care, Health and Housing and request that they carry out further specified work, in conjunction with the relevant service areas, in relation to on or more of the recommendations.

11. To defer any decision on this paper to a future meeting of Cabinet

EVALUATION/RISK MANAGEMENT

12. Contained within the Blue Paper

RECOMMENDATIONS

13. Contained within the Blue Paper

BACKGROUND PAPERS

14. None

APPENDICES

15. None

Contact Point: Cllr Roger Mazillius, Lead Member for review, Policy Commission for Care, Health and Housing. Tel: 821000 or email [email protected]

Cllr Colin West, Lead Member for review, Policy Commission for Care, Health and Housing. Tel: 821000 or email [email protected]

MRS MARGARET HOWARD

Interim Head of Housing

COUNCILLOR DAWN COUSINS

Cabinet Member for Care, Health and Housing

POLICY COMMISSION BLUE PAPER

RESPONSIBLE BODY

Policy Commission for Care, Health and Housing

PROJECT NAME

Options for Housing services

REFERENCE NUMBER

H4/05

1. BACKGROUND TO PROJECT

1.1 This item is on the Commission's agenda following a request from the Cabinet Member for Care, Health and Housing. The Scoping Pro-Forma for this item was passed by the Commission on 13 July 2005. Thereafter, it became a formal Review Project, with a deadline target of 30^th September 2005 which was slipped to allow for more consultation until 14 December 2005, for submission of the Blue Paper to Cabinet on 17 January 2006. The review was carried out on behalf of the Policy Commission by two lead Members, Cllr Roger Mazillius and Cllr Colin West.

1.2 Housing services currently falls within the remit of Adult and Community services. There are long term plans to integrate health and social care provision and also an ongoing need to provide services in the most efficient way. In light of these factors, the future location of Housing Services is being considered. The options are:

· That some or all of the functions currently provided by Housing Services could be moved into the single health and social care organisation.

· That some or all of the functions currently provided by Housing Services could be moved to other Council departments

· That some or all functions could be outsourced, possibly to Registered Social Landlords.

· Housing Services remaining within the Adult and Community Services Directorate

1.3 Functions currently carried out by Housing Services

· The Housing Renewal Team (8 full time equivalent members of staff) are responsible for the Disabled Facilities Grants, minor Repairs Grants, enforcement of Housing Conditions, enforcement of Private Drainage, empty Property, houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO), immigration Checks, water Sampling, local Searches and home Maintenance Advice.

· The Occupational Therapy Team (36) fte members of staff, including health staff) are responsible for facilitating the discharge of patients from hospital and promoting people’s independence by providing aids and adaptations to allow them to live within their own home.

· The Housing Needs Team (12.5 fte members of staff) are responsible for the provision of housing advice (via the Law Centre), prevention of homelessness, homelessness investigations, provision of temporary accommodation and administration of housing register.

· The Pan Neighbourhood Partnership Team (6.75 fte members of staff) work to engage residents and develop community involvement in PAN, build resident capacity, provide Board/Task Group representation, engage service providers, influence service provision and promote partnership working.

· The Housing Development Officer (1 fte) is responsible for the monitoring and payments of Housing Capital Expenditure, co-ordinating bids submissions to the Housing Corporation and liaison with Housing Associations on development projects, negotiating and liaising with developers and planning on section 106 agreements, commissioning new affordable housing projects and providing housing research and statistics.

· Supporting People (6.5fte members of staff) is a commissioning function purchasing housing related support which includes a wide range of activities such as assistance with life skills, budgeting, managing a tenancy and/or dealing with a neighbour dispute to enable people to maintain their tenancies.

1.4 Risk Analyses of the recommendations can be found below (which cover an operational impact assessment). The legal Implications sections are intended to provide the Cabinet with the contextual background information on which to base any policy decision that they should choose to make on this enquiry.

2 PURPOSE OF ENQUIRY AND PROPOSED OUTCOME

2.1 The purpose of this project was to identify, from an organisational point of view, the best place for Housing functions to be carried out: either by the Council, a new integrated health and social care organisation or another provider. The need to provide the best service to the customer and make the best use of resources was held as a key consideration throughout the project.

3 CONSULTATION EVIDENCE

3.1 The Commission consulted with Council officers and stakeholders and received evidence from those listed below (these can be supplied on request):

· Questionnaire, September/October 2005 - Housing staff (Occupational Therapy supporting People, Housing Renewal, Housing Development, Housing Needs and Pan Regeneration) and stakeholders

· Meeting, 9 November 2005 - Housing staff:

Ø Occupational Therapy

Ø Supporting People

Ø Housing Renewal

Ø Housing Development

Ø Housing Needs

Ø Pan Regeneration

· Meeting, 9 November 2005 - Stakeholders:

Ø Chief Executive - Medina Housing

Ø Chief Executive – Vectis Housing

Ø Transition Team Director (health and social care integration project) on behalf of the Isle of Wight Primary Care Trust (PCT) and Isle of Wight Healthcare Trust (HCT)

Ø Associate Director, Adult and Community Services, Isle of Wight Council (IWC)

Ø UNISON representative

· Interview, 28 November 2005 - Cabinet Member for Care, Health and Housing, Isle of Wight Council

4 ISSUES IDENTIFIED:

4.1 The research undertaken for this Review Project highlighted a number of main points, all of which are considered in this report and which feed into the recommendations:

(i) A need for housing functions to be kept together, with the exception of Occupational Therapy for which a stronger link with health was identified. This was supported by health partners.

(ii) There was no drive from any staff or stakeholders for Housing Renewal, Housing Development, Housing Needs, PAN or Supporting People to move outside of the Council or to a different department within the Council.

(iii) In order to provide the best service to Housing Service’s customers, Housing must remain a high priority for the Council and this should be supported by a dedicated Head of Housing.

(iv) From the information supplied by other local authorities, it was seen that the model of provision varies greatly. There is no specific model identified for the best organisation of housing services but is instead dependant upon the overall structure of a local authority’s organisational structure and preferences.

(v) Some housing staff felt there should be a separate Housing Department.

5 OPTIONS APPRAISAL

5.1 When the Commission first considered the scoping for the review the following options were outlined:

A) Some or all Housing Functions transfer to the Single health and social care organisation

B) Some or all Housing Functions transfer to other departments within the Council

C) Some or all Housing Functions transfer to an external partner

D) Some or all Housing Functions remain within Adult and Community Services

A) Some or all Housing Functions transfer to the single health and social care organisation

5.2 This option had been seriously considered in the run up to the decisions as to the shape and content of the new single organisation. However National and local developments regarding separating commissioning and provision in the NHS and the IWC developing a commissioning focus have lead to proposals for elements of commissioning to be retained by IWC pending the formation of a Public Service Board. For these evolving reasons it was considered inappropriate to transfer the non provider aspects of housing functions into the new single organisation including:

§ Supporting People.

§ Housing Needs team

§ Housing Renewal team

§ PAN

§ Housing Development

5.3 It was concluded however, that the Occupational Therapy (OT) service should be transferred to the single organisation and it is planned that the Section 31 agreement already in development is amended and concluded in the next few months to second the Council’s OTs to the HCT in advance of the new organisation being established in April 2007. The OT Services of both the IWC and HCT are already co-located at St Mary’s with an integrated manager, the early completion of the S31 implementing integrated provision and pooled budgets across the HCT and IWC will enable full advantage being made of this arrangement to align processes, policies and procedures and improve services to users by ensuring as far as possible that the same OT deals with the one user on their care pathway. The HCT and PCT have agreed that this is the most suitable and appropriate way forward. From the responses received by the OTs themselves, views were mixed, with some believing that they should stay within the Council and others believed that moving to an integrated trust was the better option.

*Strengths*	*Weaknesses*
OT and care management functions fulfil similar assessment and provision of care roles and will all be located in the single organisation.	Potentially detaches OT service from Adult and Community Service in run up to new organisation. We are dependent on OT for some performance indicators affecting adult star rating
Health and social care OTs are already collocated at St Mary’s and the conclusion of the S31 and secondment of SSD staff to the HCT will enable completion of integrated management and procedures and the development of a care pathway model for OT services.	OTs work closely with Housing Renewal Team regarding DFGS. This relationship will need to be maintained.
Follows recommendations for separating commissioning and provision in NHS

B) Some or all Housing Functions transfer to other Departments within the Council.

5.4 The majority view of stakeholders was that the remaining housing functions should stay together with Adult and Community Services. (This Department will become Healthier Communities and it is there that the Housing Local Area Agreement (LAA) targets have been located) It is unclear yet exactly what will remain in the Healthier Communities Department post April 2007 and the creation of the single organisation. However it is anticipated that the Housing functions will make up a significant part of the new Department.

5.5 None of the other Council Departments approached as part of the consultation exercise expressed a desire to integrate the Housing functions into their own.

5.6 It is of course vital that the Housing functions maintain close and effective working relationships with all aspects of Environment Services and Safer Communities and Children’s services, and the cross Departmental perspective of AIM HIGH should facilitate this. Some members of the Housing Renewal Team felt if necessary their team could locate into Environment Services

5.7 Other members of Housing staff believed that Housing should be a Directorate in its own right. However although the benefits of this in terms of maintaining a high profile were acknowledged, it was felt unlikely to generate support given the size of the teams in the housing functions.

Strengths

Weaknesses

· Would develop Housing profile and responsibility across other parts of the Council

· Diminishes Healthier Communities/ ACS directorate post April 2007

· Unlikely all aspects of Housing would fit within one department and would therefore lead to separation of functions. There is also a potential loss of critical mass which may add to cost if disaggregated.

C) Some or all Housing Functions are outsourced to an external partner

5.8 The benefits of keeping the remaining housing functions together in one Directorate were established and agreed following consultation. The prospect of externalising one or more parts of the services to an external partner was examined in this context and in the context of the Council’s statutory responsibilities that cannot be contracted out. Our partners in the local Registered Social Landlords, who would have been partners in any proposed externalisation, expressed the view that the housing functions should remain within the Council with a strong lead and voice. Furthermore it was the prevailing view that should the functions be externalised this would increase the cost to the Council.

Strengths

Weaknesses

Statutory functions cannot be outsourced

Lack of outside agencies willing to take on the aspects of Housing Services which can be legally outsourced

D) Some or all Housing functions remain within Adult and Community Services

5.9 This option for all the remaining Housing functions, except Occupational Therapy was considered and accepted. Lead Members heard evidence from the majority of staff who responded and other stakeholders and concluded that the housing functions at 7 High St (Housing Needs Team, Housing Renewal and the Housing Development Officer) benefited from that close proximity to each other and that there were economies and advantages of retaining the grouping. Members recommend that the Supporting People service be mainstreamed into the Adult services division of Adults and Community services to ensure close links between housing related support and other forms of support to vulnerable adults and to ensure the Head of Housing has adequate capacity to concentrate on core housing functions.

5.10 Members agreed that the links between Housing and Adults services were critical to improving outcomes for users of both services. Other options were considered for some of the functions within other Council Departments, but it was agreed that keeping the functions together was paramount to delivering the national and local targets and retaining “Housing” as a Council priority. It is further recommended that a permanent Head of Housing is recruited to lead the division.

5.11 If possible post April 2007 when the single organisation is in place, it would be prudent to locate all the remaining Adult and Housing services in one location thus establishing the Healthier Communities Department.

*Strengths*	*Weaknesses*
Maintains working relationships and effectiveness	May mitigate against opportunities for closer working with other departments i.e. planning
Maintains and permits development and profile of Housing	Additional pressure on the Adult’s Services management team who have a significant agenda in both preparing for the new single organisation and in meeting the efficiency targets.
Provides security and stability to small teams who have large agenda to deliver on behalf of the Council Council retain strategic control and responsibility for housing which underpins other areas and could have significant impact on CPA score

6 RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 It should be made clear that the lead Members on behalf of the Commission have considered and discounted a range of options in developing the recommendations set out below.

1) For Housing Renewal, Housing Development, Housing Needs and PAN teams to be kept as a Housing Services division within the Adult and Community Services Department. (To become known as Healthier Communities once Adult services move into the new organisation)

2) For Occupational Therapy to move into the Health Care Trust by April 2006 in advance of the new Health and Social care organisation being established in April 2007.

3) Supporting People Team to be mainstreamed into the Adult’s Services Division

4) For a permanent Head of Housing to be appointed.

6.2 These recommendations were agreed at the meeting of the Policy Commission on 14^th December 2005. Recommendation 2 was the only recommendation that was not voted through unanimously: Cllr Lumley voiced his concerns on the issue of OTs moving to a new integrated organisation and the effect that this should have on the Council’s performance indicators and star rating.

7 CUSTOMER IMPACT (VALUE FOR MONEY)

7.1 The options recommended were judged to have the greatest positive impact on both delivering the required targets on the Housing related performance indicators and in maintaining the critically important high profile of Housing related issues within the council and across Island stakeholders.

Nature of Risk	Recommendation.1	Rec. 2	Rec. 3	Rec. 4	Possible controls
Financial.	1 X 1=1	2x2=4 (Agenda for Change)	1x2=2	2x3=6	Ensuring A 4 C is adequately resourced and that HOHS post is not part of efficiency savings
Management capacity	1x1=1	1x1=1	3x4=12 (in Adults Services)	1x1=1	Rec. 4 should alleviate some of the management capacity issue
Staff morale	1x1=1	2x2=4	1x2=2	1x1=1

Impact	x	Likelihood	=	Risk
1 – Low, under £250,000		1 – Very unlikely
2 – Medium, under £500,000		2 – Possible
3 – High, under £1m		3 – Probable
4 – Catastrophic, over £1m		4 – Very likely