Agenda item

Context:

We received a report from the Housing Renewal Manager in order to provide Members with an update on the capital budget provided to support disabled facilities grants (DFGs) and Safety at Home (SAHs) grants and the impact on overall service performance and on services provided by Social Care and Health.

Key Issues:

The Council has a statutory obligation to provide DFG’s within six months of receiving a valid application. Failure to do so it risks legal challenge. It also has discretion to provide SAHs. Since 2006 a capital budget of £600,000 has been provided annually to fund both types of grant. In broad terms the budget is split into

£500,000 to support DFGs and £100,000 to support SAHs.

All DFGs are capped at £36,000 and while the majority are in the region of £4,500, each year a number of larger, complex grants are provided to meet the needs of children with complex disabilities. Increasingly, this also relates to adults who are disabled as a result of trauma or degenerative diseases. Client feedback has confirmed that adaptations significantly impact on the quality of life of both applicants and carers. Also, customer satisfaction scores of 95% are regularly being achieved.

SAHs are intended for smaller works such as handrails, half steps and minor alterations, often costing less than £250 but which make a dwelling safer. They are frequently commissioned to facilitate hospital discharge, or to reduce the risk of falls and injuries which might necessitate hospitalisation. Both grants play a key role in facilitating discharge from hospital and preventing admission.

In addition to the impact upon client of having to wait longer for adaptations to be carried out, the annual shortage of funds and ever earlier full commitment of them has adverse effects on the Council’s performance in respect of DFG turnaround which is a KPI that is monitored closely by the Welsh Government and in particular by the Older Persons Commissioner for Wales.

Alternatives to DFGs and SAHs do exist, though none are as attractive as grant aid but nevertheless some potential grant recipients do opt to proceed with the necessary works at their own cost.

The options available to the Council are:

·         Continue with the status quo. The advantage of this option is the Council’s current capital commitment for disabled adaptations is maintained and there is no additional impact on the wider capital programme. The disadvantages are: the Council will continue to have a backlog of applicants waiting for disabled adaptations and the associated impacts on safety and quality of life for associated individuals; it makes no allowances for the impact of certainly previous inflationary pressures and there will be a continued impact on Social Care & Health services.

·         Increasing the annual available capital funding for disabled adaptations. The advantage of this option is this will help to reduce (or eliminate) the number of applicants waiting and ease the pressures on Social Care & Health services. The disadvantage is there will be a knock on impact on the Council’s wider capital programme and the Council may need to dis-invest in another priority in order to facilitate any increase.

·         One-off additional capital contribution to the current budget. The advantage of this option would be to help temporarily reduce (or eliminate) the number of applicants waiting for adaptations and ease the current pressures for individuals and Social Care and Health services. The disadvantage is that this option only provides a temporary respite and a backlog would quickly build up again.

·         Prudential borrowing. This option requires revenue funding. The necessary available revenue is cannot be facilitated because of the on-going commitment to meet financial targets relating to Cabinet mandates. Also, although the addressing of the current backlog may have some revenue benefits for Social Care through reduced care packages, these are regarded to be marginal and would not provide cashable/bankable benefits that could be directed towards funding borrowing repayments.

Member Scrutiny:

Members raised concerns that the issues would increase due to the emphasis on independent living, and the introduction of the Wellbeing Act requesting more preventative measures to be taken.  Officers were asked their vision of the future.  In response the Housing Renewals Manager explained that the waiting list increased year on year and would continue to do so, which was a major concern.

A Member stressed that the LDP highlighted the need to build but did not take on board what was actually needed within the house.  Houses not only needed to provide space but should include spaces such as a downstairs wetroom and more accessible facilities.  It was important for developers and housing associations to recognise the needs of an aging population and to encourage independent living.  

We were advised that the builders would say that disabled adaptations were not marketable and private sector landlords may refuse to give permission.  However, more and more properties were now being built in accordance with movement issues.

We noted that discussions to improve development did not address current issues.  It was agreed that discussions with planning colleagues would be beneficial.  It was noted that feedback would be given to Welsh Government, who dictate the conditions of social housing.

The Chair advised that the Committee were less able to make technical recommendations but suggested that continuing with the status quo would not be a recommendation of the committee in light of the new Social Services and Wellbeing Act.  The Committee would like to see more monies made available but were not best placed to say how.  It was noted that the new Act places new expectations on the Council. 

The Committee acknowledged that the Chair of Planning Committee had, for many years, been asking for a new approach with housing development.  The Chair suggested that Adults Select Committee request that a task and finish group be coordinated with Planning Committee, to work jointly with officers.

Recommendations:

The report recommended that the Committee note the contents and implications of the report and consider the options itemised in this report and recommend to Cabinet a proposed option for going forward.