Decision details

Matter for Decision

The draft policy contained within Appendix A of the Officer’s report aims to replace the existing Cambridgeshire Adaptations & Repairs Policy adopted in 2019. It proposes a continuation of the same types of financial assistance for eligible applicants on low incomes for adaptations, repairs and improvement to their homes, but with some improvements to help support positive health and wellbeing outcomes.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Housing

      i.         Approved the Cambridgeshire Housing Adaptations, Repairs and Renewals Policy 2025-2030 at Appendix A of the Officer’s report, as it related to Cambridge City Council, to replace the existing Cambridgeshire Adaptations & Repairs Policy 2019.

    ii.         Delegated authority to the Assistant Director of Housing & Health to agree, subject to sufficient funding being available from the council’s ring-fenced capital allocation, and in consultation with the Executive Councillor for Housing, Chair & Vice-Chair of Housing Scrutiny Committee and Opposition Spokes (or their successors):

a.    any future changes to the maximum amounts of financial assistance payable which may be needed during the life of the policy;

b.    capital funding of any additional partnership work or other projects which may be appropriate to meet the objectives of the policy; and

c.    any other minor changes which may be required during the life of the policy.

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

The Committee received a report from the Housing Strategy Manager.

 

The Housing Strategy Manager and the Home Improvement Agency Manager said the following in response to Members’ questions:

      i.         A Project Officer had been employed specifically to increase awareness of the Disabled Facilities Grant (DFGs) within the Council’s administrative area and to network with communities as there had been an underspend in the DFGs over recent years. Other work to promote DFGs included reaching out to over 1000 residents through 15 public facing events, 30 professional organisations across health and social care, and targeted leaflet drops to 1400 properties.

    ii.         In the past additional DFG funding had been allocated to all local authorities. Due to Cambridge City Council’s underspend, the Council passed their additional allocation to  Huntingdonshire District Council as part of the shared Home Improvement Agency service as their demand for DFG funding was higher and it served to support the Cambridgeshire areas social care needs as a whole.

   iii.         Approximately 80 DFG adaptations were undertaken in Cambridge per annum at a cost of around £540,000 against a budget of £827,000. Agreed to provide data and demography about the grant recipients outside of the meeting.

  iv.         In terms of forecasting DFG need year on year it wasn’t just about demographic need but also the life of adaptations and potential need for replacement which needed to be taken into account. 

    v.         Cambridge City tended to have a younger population compared with neighbouring authorities and there are also some affluent areas within the City which means some applicants are not eligible for the means tested grants.

  vi.         Noted reference to a ‘savings cap’; £6000 savings would be disregarded as part of the means test for grant funding.

 vii.         The ‘means test’ is outdated; many people are not eligible for the grant funding due to their income / occupational pensions which are all considered as part of the application process.

viii.         The increased DFG top up grant funding will particularly help with children’s cases where disabled needs could not be met, as construction costs have increased. Five years ago an extension would have cost in the region of £40,000, which now costs £60,000; without top up funding the works could not be funded.

  ix.         A team of Caseworkers are employed to help applicants complete their application forms. They also support applicants through the planning and building regulation process and liaise with builders.

    x.         Officers had explored whether the application process could be digitalised but this tended to make the process more complicated.

  xi.         The law requires consultation with social services and most referrals to the Cambridgeshire Home Improvement Agency (CHIA) came in following occupational therapy assessments.

 xii.         CHIA offers a self-funding service to people who are not eligible for a grant.

xiii.         In response to a query about whether CHIA explored why people didn’t use the service following an expression of interest - advised that if people weren’t eligible for grant funding, they would either fund the adaptations themselves, they may move or they may choose not to have the adaptations done which could put them at risk.

xiv.         Noted that Huntingdonshire District Council did not have their own council housing stock. Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire District Council spent approximately £1.6 million in addition to the DFG budget on adapting council homes.

xv.         Partners of applicants are also means tested for DFGs as this is a legislative requirement. Officers do identify and challenge situations where financial / coercive control is suspected.

xvi.         DFG funding cannot be used to fund mobility scooters, officers are not aware if other grant funding is available.

xvii.         Where a contractor delayed the delivery of adaptations there would be flexibility with regards to the requirement for the works to be delivered within 12 months of the grant approval. 

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.