Agenda item

(To receive a report by Carl Miller, Commercial and Procurement Manager – People Services, which invites the Committee to consider the commissioning and procurement of housing related support services which is due to be considered by the Executive on 1 October 2019)

The Committee received a report which invited members to consider a report on the commissioning and procurement of housing related support services which was due to be considered by the Executive on 1 October 2019.

It was reported that the Council commissioned a number of contracts to deliver housing related support services to adults.  These contracts comprised of:

·         Emergency accommodation based support – this offered intensive support for up to three months in designated accommodation;

·         Non-emergency accommodation based support – this offered support for up to six months in designated accommodation;

·         Floating support – this offered support for up to six months (not linked to designated accommodation); and

·         Rough sleeper street outreach – which offered assertive outreach and targeted support for up to a maximum of 18 months.

Members were advised that the services worked together to form a structured model of support for people who were currently homeless or at risk of losing their home.  The support helped people with their immediate housing need and to regain or sustain their independence.

The Council also commissioned the following services, linked to housing, which were packaged together with housing related support services when they were last commissioned in 2015:

·         Two domestic abuse refuges – offering a place of safety and support for up to six months for victims of domestic abuse; and

·         Mental health crisis houses – offering a step down from hospital admission or a preventative stay for up to 10 days.

With the exception of the floating support and rough sleeper street outreach elements, which concluded on 31 March 2021, the contracts were all due to end on 30 June 2020, and as a consequence decisions needed to be made about the future commissioning of the services.  The report presented the case for re-commissioning a reconfigured housing related support service for adults in Lincolnshire (Re-commissioning of Children's Services housing related support was the subject of a separate report to the Executive).

Members were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained in the report and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         It was noted that this was tied into the Wellbeing Service and it was about support and prevention.

·         Since the model was last commissioned in 2015, legislation had changed and there was a new duty to refer on all public authorities.  The role of district councils had also changed and there was now an overlap with some of the County Council's services.

·         The existing service had several components and a number of providers.  The aim was to reduce the number of providers.

·         Members were advised that one element which would not be changing was the domestic abuse refuges, which were working well and were a relatively small part of the budget but were fundamental to the service.

·         The time that district councils had to work with people who were at risk of becoming homeless had been extended.

·         City of Lincoln, East Lindsey and Boston Borough Councils had secured funding through the government's Rough Sleeping Initiative, and Boston had secured funding for all seven Districts from the Controlling Migration Fund to help foreign nationals, however this was short term funding.  It was expected that there would be more, but it was not known how much there would be or when it would be released.

·         It was highlighted that the housing related support service did not pay for accommodation.  It was about providing support to enable people to maintain their tenancies.

·         It should complement the service provided by district councils rather than duplicate it.

·         Members were advised that the primary risk was of a potential lack of interest from the market if designated accommodation was removed.

·         In the past it had been difficult to get mental health representatives to attend the Vulnerable Adults Panel.  However, a 'Team Around the Adult' had now been adopted (similar to the "Team Around the Child" (TAC) model in Children's Services)

·         All the districts had signed up to this, and pilots were being run, which was positive as any hitches could be discovered before the start of the new contract.

·         It was queried who would be providing the street outreach service after the current contract ended.  The current provider would continue until March 2021, and then the districts who would need it may fund it themselves or get external funding.  The key hotspots were City of Lincoln, East Lindsey and Boston and there was an ongoing conversation.

·         It was highlighted that the report stated that the new eligibility criteria would restrict the number of people eligible for housing related support services in future by 37%, and it was queried where those people would be able to find help.  Members were advised that those people who did not meet the eligibility criteria would need to go direct to the district council (which they should be doing already).  It was noted that of the current service users, 37% would be referred straight to the district council.  Not everyone covered by this service was homeless or had mental health and/or substance misuse problems.

·         The people this service would target would be highly vulnerable and the service would provide a wraparound service.

·         It was noted that the health service did not currently have a dual diagnosis system.  The Council was working with the NHS and could provide an alcohol and substance misuse service, but not the clinical support.  There was a need to make it quicker for these people to get the support they needed.

·         The service would focus on the people that needed the support the most, and they would be supported to maintain their housing (but the district council would support them to get housed).

·         It was noted that there were 18 reasons why people could enter the Service, and the district council had to report back 80 pieces of information to government.  The district council staff were very good at working with people, and there was a need to determine which of the criteria fell within the 'day job' of the district council.  The district council would make the support plan available to the support provider of this contract.  This was to ensure that the support worker did not duplicate the work of other people.

·         It was noted that the Council did not currently pay for accommodation costs as it did not own the property.  The property was owned by the provider.

·         It was commented by one member that they would support the Council having some designated accommodation.

·         This report was welcomed as was the work which was being done by the county and district councils. 

·         It was queried what involvement there had been with charities that worked within this field.  It was noted that this was similar to the wellbeing model.  When a person was coming through the Service, they needed to feel secure, and as well as when they left the Service.  The charitable sector was really helpful in this area.  It was also highlighted that most of the providers were registered charitable organisations as well.  There was confidence that there was appropriate experience within the providers.

·         It was queried how councillors could help someone to access the Service.  Officers advised that they should be encouraged to contact their district council, and the duty to refer required the consent of the individual.  It must also be accepted that some adults may choose to make unwise choices.

RESOLVED

1.    That the Committee support the recommendations to the Executive as set out in the report.

2.    That the following comments be passed to the Executive:

·         Rough Sleeper Street Outreach - The current provider would continue to provide the service until the end of its contract on 31 March 2021.  This service would not be included in the new service model after this date.  District councils would then be the responsible for funding it themselves or seeking external funding.  

·         Eligibility for the Reconfigured Service - The 37% of adults who would no longer be eligible for the service would be supported by the district councils as part of their housing and homelessness reduction duties.  The service would be aimed at highly vulnerable adults aged over 18 years old, who required support to secure and maintain accommodation and who also had mental health needs and/or substance misuse issues.  The Council was urging the NHS to introduce a new dual diagnosis service for identifying and treating mental health and substance misuse, which was not currently available.

·         Accommodation - The Committee supported the inclusion of some designated accommodation in the contract, if this was required to attract the market.  A decision on its inclusion would be addressed by the delegated powers in Recommendation 4. 

·         Charities Sector - The charities sector was involved and provided additional services and support to these vulnerable adults.