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 scheme. 

(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 into the Void and Nominations agreement for scheme A.

1.  Entering into this agreement will enable the identified property to continue to be utilised as a supported living scheme within the city, aligning with Council, Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and City strategies and providing consistent access to housing appropriate to meeting the needs of individuals with Learning Disabilities in the longer term.

2.  Supported living environments enable vulnerable individuals to live their lives within communities, supporting outcomes associated with increasing independence and improved health and wellbeing, thereby supporting a Strengths Based Approach.

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, Social Care 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 continue to support    individuals to live more independently outside of other models of    care, such as residential care settings

·   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.

·  the current tenants offer peer support and social interaction,   improving wellbeing and management of housing/care and   support needs.

·  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