Decision details

(i)  For the Leader and Clean Growth & Development to approve the recommendation to enter into a void and nomination agreement in relation to a current supported living setting.

(ii)  To be aware of potential void risk and associated financial liabilities, but this is not expected to be above the current position.

(iii)  To delegate authority to the Director of Quality and Integration, to approve and enter in the Void and Nominations Agreement for Scheme B.

1.  Entering into this agreement will enable the identified property to be utilised as a long term supported living scheme within the city, aligning with Council, Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and City strategies.

2.  The use of supported living aids the implementation of Adult Social Care’s Strengths Based Approach towards supporting individuals with care and support needs and enables people with autism and learning disabilities to live more independently, exercise more choice and control over their lives, and ultimately improve health and wellbeing outcomes.

3.  These improved outcomes, alongside an ability to manage support needs more flexibly, result in the delivery of more cost effective care and support for Adult, Housing and Communities budgets.

1.  To not enter into the void and nomination agreement – This option is not recommended because:

·  it does not support the city’s key strategies,

·  it does not present the opportunity to support individuals to live more independently, moving out of residential care settings and back to the city

·  it does not present the council with opportunities to generate more cost effective solutions to deliver support

·  due to uncertainty within the sector, Registered Providers are increasingly viewing this type of housing as unattractive without void and nomination agreements. 

·  the council will have no nomination rights meaning future placements can be made which do not align with our strategic approach or the needs of current tenants

·  without an agreement in place, properties can be sold with little or no notice to the council who will be required to source alternative placements which at short notice is likely to be residential care.

2.  For the council to pursue its own purchase, refurbishment and development programme in relation to the development of supported housing. This is not recommended at the current time because:

·  This is being considered as a longer term option which requires   considerable work across the council, in order to establish the   viability of potential capital investment by the council, in   appropriate properties.

·  At present this option does not help the Integrated   Commissioning Unit (ICU) to achieve its objectives around the accommodation targets in reasonable time, and specifically,   meeting immediate need for this group of tenants.

3.  To place individuals with a learning disability/autism on the Housing Register to access one off general needs property. This option is not recommended because: 

·  The council has a duty under the Care Act (2014) to provide suitable housing for vulnerable individuals which must take account fully of their needs (s.23).

·  it would lead to inefficiencies in relation to the delivery of care and support to these individuals.

·  It does not enable intensive housing management support to be delivered to the tenants, which provides increased support to maintain their tenancy

·  Housing needs cannot be met within the current waiting time period