Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Decision details
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Housing
Decision status: Recommendations Approved
Is Key decision?: No
Is subject to call in?: No
Decision required to update policy in relation to Housing First and Local Lettings policies.
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