A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Decision details

Decision details

Local Policy Updates

Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Housing

Decision status: Recommendations Approved

Is Key decision?: No

Is subject to call in?: No

Purpose:

Decision required to update policy in relation to Housing First and Local Lettings policies.

Decision:

Matter for Decision

     i.        The Local Lettings Policy sets out Cambridge City Council’s (CCC) position on the management of its own social housing stock through the use of Local Letting Plans.  A Local Lettings Plan is a set of guidelines or criteria governing which households can be allocated accommodation in a specific designated area. Local Lettings Plans are used to help create balance and cohesion where either a specific set of circumstances need to be addressed or where there are wider strategic objectives, such as helping to support the local economy.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Housing

     i.        Approved the Policy included in Appendix A of the Officers Report

 

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 Head of Housing.

 

In response to Members’ questions, the Head of Housing confirmed that the report would return to this committee should there be any proposals to significantly change the policy.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendation.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendation.

 

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

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.

 

Matter for Decision

     i.        The Council had been working with the County Council to develop a Housing First programme for Cambridge City.

    ii.        There were plans to develop and test various Housing First models over the coming years so that the Council can evaluate the efficacy of these different approaches, but also because the needs of customers who sleep rough or who are at risk of rough sleeping cannot be met with a one-size-fits-all option and local consultation suggests they are in favour of a range of options.

  iii.        One of the models being developed involved a ‘caretaker’ living adjacent to customers in designated Housing First flats.

  iv.        The caretaker would be employed by the Council and consideration needed to be given to how to recruit the best person for the role and the process for allocating the accommodation.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Housing

     i.        Delegated authority to the Head of Housing to allocate accommodation to Housing First caretakers outside of the Council’s Lettings Policy.

    ii.        An update report to be brought to Housing Scrutiny Committee when the initial project had been running for 6 months.

 

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 Head of Housing.

 

The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:

     i.        Welcomed the idea but suggested that the pay band might be rather low for what could be a very demanding role.

    ii.        Questioned the level of support that would be provided to the Caretakers.

  iii.        Suggested that there was a lot to be learnt from the first incumbents of the roles and asked if they could be invited to meet members of this committee.

 

The Head of Housing said the following in response to Members’ questions:

     i.        The Caretakers were not intended to be support workers.

    ii.        The recruitment process would be rigorous.

  iii.        Confirmed that, in terms of Housing First programmes more generally, extensive research into what had been successful in other areas had been carried out but that the Council had not discovered many examples of this caretaker-type arrangement. However, the Head of Housing had seen a similar model in action in London.

  iv.        This was a pilot project and would be reviewed.

   v.        Caretakers would be line managed by the Supported Housing Service.

 

The Committee suggested that the recommendations should be amended to reflect their desire for feedback from the initial project.

 

The following additional recommendation was agreed:

 

An update report to be brought to Housing Scrutiny Committee when the initial project had been running for 6 months.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the amended 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.

 

 

Publication date: 26/02/2020

Date of decision: 15/01/2020