Agenda item

Adoption of a new Housing Assistance Policy

Minutes:

Mr Bob Porter, Head of Housing & Planning introduced the item for debate and made the following points:

 

  • The Council had a duty to provide disabled facilities grants to residents who required assistance with the adaptations to their properties;
  • Councils have a mandatory duty to offer disabled facilities grants, up to £30k to qualifying applicants;
  • Grants are funded by a grant from government;
  • The current policy was put in place at a time when there were significant resource limitations for the demand;
  • However the council no longer has a waiting list;
  • The current funding allows greater flexibility to councils to offer further discretionary assistance;
  • The new policy proposes a new service to assist people to return home from hospital more quickly and an enhanced handyman service;
  • The new policy also proposes a new grant for energy efficiency improvements in certain circumstances and extends the current minor repairs grants;
  • The new policy provides for the cost of administering grants to be met from the DFG funding.

 

Responding to the presentation Members of the Panel made comments and asked questions as follows:

 

  • What was the proportionality between the grants and loans under this policy?
  • Did the policy assist those under hardship conditions?
  • Did the policy cover council tenants?
  • Had council considered assisting local families to buy the properties they lived in, where appropriate?
  • How easy was it to access these grants?
  • Was the information on these grants readily available to the public?
  • Members welcomed the good news that the council had cleared the backlog for those waiting for assistance under these grants and that the service was expanding;
  • How was the council working with KCC and CCG regarding meeting the threshold required for an individual to get care support?
  • Why were elected Members not involved in the process?
  • In the report, there were indications that KCC had top sliced £405k for use on other projects. Were these funds ring fenced for use for Thanet residents’ needs?
  • Who scrutinised the performance of the service providers under this scheme?
  • Could more clarity be provided about under what circumstances were individuals in receipt of the DFGs required to pay back?

 

Mr Porter responded as follows:

 

  • Mandatory facilities grants were separate from loans;
  • The policy did allow for hardships;
  • Later in the year, a new policy will be presented to Cabinet and it will also cover providing adaptations to council tenants houses which were as generous as those provided to non council tenants;
  • Council provides loans of up to £20k for households buying an empty property in Cliftonville to refurbish for owner occupation;
  • Professionals working with individuals due for discharge from hospitals or others who required adaptations to their homes would normally advise the individuals about these grants;
  • There can be delays in the completion of occupational therapist assessments and the new policy enables some additional dedicated resources to speed up this process;
  • The funding proposals are profiled over three years, using the resources currently available;
  • Accessing these grants is means tested. However the council would always try to provide universal access to services such as handyman services;
  • The proposed policy includes an appeals process;
  • The £405k was not ring fenced. However in the first year of implementation, TDC insisted that KCC spent £2.1 million set aside for DFGs. KCC spent close to that amount;
  • Service providers were scrutinised by local authorities that hosted the funding; either KCC or TDC.

 

Thereafter Councillor Campbell proposed, Councillor Rusiecki seconded and Members agreed the following:

 

  1. That KCC ring fenced the £405k for use by Thanet residents;
  2. To note the report.

Supporting documents: