Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Contents
1. Legislative context 4-5
2. Background 6-26
3. Consultation 27-37
4. Discussion and findings: Part A, 38-56 Overview
• Achievements during previous strategy • Details of partnership working • Evaluation of current tools
5. Discussion and findings: Part B, 57-63 Statistical analysis: Main causes of homelessness
6. Discussion and findings: Part C, 64-137 Specific themes
• Violent breakdown of relationship involving partner • Parents no longer willing to accommodate • Other relatives or friends no longer willing or able to accommodate • Termination of assured shorthold tenancy • Required to leave accommodation provided by Home Office as asylum support • Non-priority homelessness • Intentional homelessness • (Black Minority Ethnic (BME) homelessness • Disability • Gender • Sexuality • Religion • Age • Youth homelessness • 16-17 year olds • Teenage pregnancy • Looked after children
2 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 • Gypsies and travellers • Armed forces • Eligibility (EU nationals) • Rough sleeping • Finance, benefits and debt • Education, skills and employment • Repossessions • Arrears • Offending • Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) • Drugs and alcohol • Mental and physical health • Joint working protocol: Community Mental Health Team • Joint Working Protocol: Learning Disability Team • Wards • Safer and stronger communities (P1 areas) • Joint working: Stockport Homes’ Housing Management • Move on Strategy / Move on Plans Protocol • Registered Social Landlords and Housing Associations • Affordable housing • Risks
7. Equality Impact Assessment 138
8. Forming the Homelessness Strategy 139
9. List of key tables and figures 140-141
10. Glossary of terms and abbreviations 142-143
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 3 1. Legislative context
The 2002 Homelessness Act introduced a requirement on Local Authorities to ensure that they took a strategic approach to dealing with the issue of homelessness within their Borough. This was the first time that local authorities were legally obliged to plan in this way with a strong emphasis given to homelessness prevention. The same Act also extended a number of the duties local authorities owed to homeless people, and widened the safety net to include more classes of people deemed to be in ‘priority need’.
The legislation states that:
“There is a duty for local housing authorities to formulate a Homelessness Strategy. A local housing authority (“the authority”) may from time-to-time - carry out a homelessness review for their district; and formulate and publish a Homelessness Strategy based on the results of that review.1”
The accompanying Code of Guidance further clarifies:
“All housing authorities must have in place a Homelessness Strategy based on a review of all forms of homelessness in their district.2”
This review therefore will provide a detailed account of causes of and associated issues around homelessness. Key action points drawn from this review will go on to formulate the 2011 Stockport Homelessness Strategy.
Legislation requires that homelessness strategies must run for a maximum period of five years. In 2003 a decision was taken to produce Stockport’s first strategy for a three year period as it was thought that the environment, both nationally and locally, was developing rapidly and so a further review of the situation would be needed sooner. The second strategy was also produced over a three year period to continue this trend, and to ensure it was responsive to the needs of those approaching Stockport for assistance.
4 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Given the current economic and political climate and resulting concerns about funding and commissioning of services, a decision has been made to produce the new strategy over the full five year timescale. This remains in line with guidelines set out by homelessness legislation, whilst providing a long-term vision for addressing and preventing homelessness within the Stockport Borough.
The development of the new Homelessness Strategy has been linked to the Allocations Policy Review to maximise the opportunities and impact of both of these considerable projects, achieve combined results and potentially greater outcomes. This is due to the recognition of several overlapping themes between the two projects.
The previous strategy drew on the Action Plan set out in the Government Strategy ‘Sustainable Communities: settled homes; changing lives’3. This focussed on methods of homelessness prevention, support for vulnerable groups, increasing the supply of settled homes and tackling the wider causes and symptoms of homelessness. This strategy also established what later became National Indicator 156; halving the number of families in temporary accommodation by 2010. The National Indicator set 1. ODPM, 2002 replaced Best Value Performance Indicators in April 2008, which were reported in the 2. CLG, 2006 previous review. The majority of these indicators have been kept for local performance 3. ODPM, 2005 monitoring purposes however, and will factor in this review.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 5 2. Background
Homelessness Strategy 2007-2010
The outgoing Homelessness Strategy set out a 36 point action plan to tackle homelessness within the Borough. The Action Plan had three key themes: Homelessness Prevention and Housing Options; Support; and Strategic Working. Almost all of the 36 actions have now been achieved; where this has not been the case this has usually been due to strategic groups disbanding, such as the Alcohol Reference Group, or delays in introducing larger schemes involving a greater concentration of resources, such as the Accredited Landlords Scheme. Those which have not been achieved are still work in progress, and will be re-evaluated for inclusion in the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy.
Local priorities
Local priorities in Stockport have progressed since the previous strategy, encompassing improvement priorities based on the National Indicator Set introduced in April 2008. The Local Area Agreement 2008/09-2010/11 was drawn up to underpin the Borough’s Sustainable Communities Strategy and Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy, with a clear focus on economic activity, social inclusion and environmental improvement. The forthcoming Homelessness Strategy therefore will be constructed to form strategic links to these areas.
In the overarching Stockport Community Strategy, ‘The Stockport Strategy 2020’ (May 2009), the Local Strategic Partnership (Stockport Partnership) sets out the long-term vision for services and provision in Stockport with four priorities to make Stockport:
1. Thriving 2. Safer and stronger 3. Healthy 4. Greener
In their preceding analysis to the Community Strategy, ‘the State of the Borough’4, the partnership found Stockport to be an area of good economic performance and social profile, with strong connectivity and quality of life. However, it outlined concerns that the pace of economic growth had been slow over the past few years, and found social inequality and crime to be a growing problem for the Borough. It cited polarisation of populations, deprived communities, cross border crime and intergenerational conflict due to an ageing population as particular issues. Additionally it expressed concerns about affordability and lack of social housing stock in comparison with other Boroughs in Greater Manchester.
‘The State of the Borough’ predicted drivers for change in Stockport which are directly related to constructing the Homelessness Strategy 2011. These include demographic 4. Local Futures change through an ageing population putting increasing pressure on local services and Group Audit, housing; polarisation in income, housing, health and employment; social expectations June 2007 and aspirations; and the political agenda. This report also enlisted participants for a
6 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 workshop on producing a vision for Stockport, which raised the following points of relevance and prompts for future ambitions of the Homelessness Strategy 2011:
• High employment across skills levels • Improve life chances of deprived residents • Narrow the gap in employment, health and education • Raise aspirations • Engagement in community and voluntary activity • Increase healthy life expectancy in deprived areas • Raise awareness of and de-stigmatise mental health • Reduce / continue to reduce crime • Reduce fear of crime • Improve young people’s satisfaction with the local area • Greater housing mix and affordability
Within these points the group identified priorities in tackling worklessness, increasing access to education, engaging young people and balancing the housing market to decrease polarisation; these points will be addressed by both the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy and the Allocations Policy Review.
The outcomes of ‘the State of the Borough’ and its consultation led to the development of the community strategy to deliver Stockport’s vision for the future, ‘The Stockport Strategy 2020’. The strategy is a ten year Action Plan for the Borough, and sets out priorities including:
• supporting diversity; • improving quality of life for everyone; • supporting long term unemployed residents through the Stockport into Work programme; • pilot working Neighbourhood Teams and hold skills and employment events in priority areas; • encourage and support young people to make a positive contribution; • develop and simplify opportunities for local people to have their say and be involved in the local decision making process; and • adopt a community based approach to health.
Perhaps the most directly relevant point to the Homelessness Strategy 2011 is:
“Invest in affordable housing, particularly social rented to meet demand for a greater mix of housing options across the Borough. We will maximise opportunities offered by the Government’s Affordable Housing Programme, our land, our ability to raise prudential borrowing and grant from the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) to provide high quality ‘council’ homes in Brinnington, to be the first of many”.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 7 Additionally all partners in the Local Strategic Partnership have signed up to the Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy, which aims to improve the quality of life in priority areas and reduce social inequality.
At present the Homelessness Strategy sits under to the Stockport Housing Strategy, which has strategic links to the Stockport Strategy and Local Strategic Partnership. The forthcoming Homelessness Strategy 2011 will aim to strengthen these links by establishing overlapping strategic priorities, to ensure its continued relevance and maximise partnership working opportunities.
Regional priorities
Benchmarking the current strategies of the other Manchester Boroughs (some are due for review in the coming year), the following strategic links are found to recur:
1. Accommodation of 16-17 year olds 2. Responding to the recession / value for money 3. Mortgage rescue initiatives 4. Worklessness / social and financial inclusion 5. Stock maximisation 6. Partnership working / engaging with Registered Social Landlords (RSLs)
Attention should be paid to how services can be compared and integrated with those elsewhere in Greater Manchester, and therefore the new Homelessness Strategy should consider identifying actions from the list above. This is especially important given limited funding opportunities and the new government’s interest in sub-regional joint working.
A Greater Manchester Combined Authority was being planned for 2011, designed to replace a range of single-purpose joint boards and quangos and provide a formal administrative authority. However, the future funding of such regional bodies has become uncertain, despite the new government favouring such sub-regional joint working. If taken forward, this strategic regional authority will have authority over areas including housing, although each borough will also retain their own strategies. The benefit of a combined authority however could be seen in joint funding opportunities, information sharing and protocols, which in an uncertain time for local authorities may be beneficial to the ongoing prevention of homelessness.
National priorities
On a national level, there has not been a renewal to overarching Government strategy around homelessness since ‘Sustainable Communities: settled homes, changing lives’. However, there have been a number of individual strategies, Action Plans and statutory guidance documents issued concerning homelessness and related socio-economic factors. These include, but are not limited to:
8 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Fig. 1. Communities and Local 2007 Homes for the Future: More affordable, more Government (CLG) sustainable Hills (CLG) 2007 Ends and Means: The future roles of social housing in England CLG 2008 No one Left Out: Communities ending rough sleeping HM Government 2009 Together we can end violence against women and girls: a strategy HM Government 2009 Welfare Reform Act CLG / Department for 2010 Provision of accommodation for 16 and 17 Children, Schools and year old young people who may be homeless Families (DCSF) and / or require accommodation
These Government documents are in addition to a number of pieces of work by other statutory agencies, including Supporting People and the Department of Health, and third sector parties such as Shelter and Crisis. Although there has been no recent nationwide Homelessness Strategy, there have been clear priorities set out in areas such as rough sleeping, youth homelessness, domestic violence and worklessness. Each of these areas bears relevance to the profile of homelessness within Stockport, and will contribute to priorities set out in the new Homelessness Strategy.
In addition to setting out guidance and strategic objectives, the Government also amended the way in which homelessness statistics were monitored and reported within the lifetime of the previous strategy. The most significant change was ending the use of Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPIs), which formed a key area of focus for the previous Homelessness Strategy and Review. The BVPIs were replaced by the aforementioned National Indicator Set in October 2007, of which Stockport Homes Housing Options Team is directly responsible for the return of one – National Indicator 156: number of households in temporary accommodation. A thorough analysis of the progress in meeting this National Indicator is undertaken later in this document. As well as directly reporting upon this indicator, the Council in partnership with Stockport Homes also contributes to a number of other indicators in the set reported by other agencies, including:
Fig. 2. National Indicator Lead agency HOT contribution NI142: Number of Stockport Homes Housing Support Point, vulnerable people who support planning in are supported to maintain temporary accommodation independent living homelessness prevention NI46: Young offenders Youth Offending Team Joint working protocol; access to suitable (YOT) dedicated officer for accommodation offenders
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 9 NI143: Offenders under Probation Joint working protocol; Probation supervision living dedicated officer for in settled and suitable offenders accommodation at the end of their order or license NI145: Adults with learning Social Care Joint working protocol disabilities in settled offering number of withheld accommodation properties NI146: Care leavers in Social Care Joint working protocol suitable accommodation offering number of withheld properties
The forthcoming strategy will look to build upon Stockport Homes’ influence on these indicators, and strengthen links to its partner agencies.
Although the Government has ceased the use of BVPIs, these continue to be monitored on a local level and via the quarterly P1E returns. This includes the number of rough sleepers found on annual counts, and homelessness prevention measures and performance. These indicators give a government steer on how local authorities should be performing, so achieving these indicators will remain a priority within the new Homelessness Strategy.
2010 Election Results
Since work on the Homelessness Review and Strategy 2011 commenced, there has been a change in Government which may have implications for the resources and attention paid to homelessness issues. Early indications of what course the new Government may take can be gleaned from an earlier Green Paper by the Conservative Party, ‘Strong Foundations: Building Homes and Communities’5. Much of the green paper centred on flexible house building, local priorities and increased mobility for existing social tenants. These initiatives would have the effect of both freeing up existing stock, and enabling tenants to move more easily. There is potential for including these recommendations in both the Allocations Review and Homelessness Strategy; this is in support of findings later in this document about the number of tenants who are made homeless due to issues such as Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) and domestic violence.
Another key proposal is to bring empty properties back into use through an ‘Empty Property Rescue Scheme, which would allow housing associations to bid for funds through the Homes and Communities Agency. However, the implications of this are that the party plan to “give housing associations the flexibility to allocate these 5. properties acquired as they see fit…they will not be bound by the overarching national Conservative Party, Policy criteria for assessment of need”. The acquisition of additional stock by RSLs therefore Green Paper may not come to benefit those at risk of, or experiencing homeless; however it does no.10, 2009 raise the need to follow up partnership working begun under the previous strategy. It
10 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 could also have a general impact on easing housing need and demand, and therefore developments should be monitored closely.
The green paper states clearly that the party will “implement a range of policies to address the problems of homelessness”; although information on these is limited it does refer to an earlier paper by the new Housing Minister, Grant Shapps. The paper, ‘A Blueprint to Tackle Homelessness’6 proposes a cross-departmental approach involving the Department for Work and Pensions, the Department of Health, the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Defence. The following key commitments can be ascertained from this paper:
• Accurate rough sleeping counts: this will entail an overhaul of the current regulations and criteria for counts, with the aim of gaining more accurate assessments of the levels of rough sleeping in England • Helping the homeless into work via ‘Welfare to Work’ proposals: these include removing restrictions on voluntary work, reforming housing benefit to make working in temporary accommodation more affordable, and offering alternatives to an address – for example, through Post Office Boxes • Allowing housing organisations to co-ordinate with GPs and receive funding for public health work • To allow prisoners to build up funds through working, to enable them to secure housing upon their release • To strengthen the military covenant, giving priority to those leaving active military service.
At present only limited content of this paper has been expanded upon; primarily with the announcement of the new requirement to provide rough sleeping estimates on a yearly basis, and the widened criteria of who will be counted in these estimates. What can be gathered from both this and the green paper however is similar to that for tenants; the new government will place an emphasis on sustainable working 6. Shapps, G., communities, and social mobility. The links to health and justice furthermore suggest 2008 a continuation of the ‘enhanced housing options’ approach already begun under New 7. CLG, 2008 Labour.7
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 11 Statistical data, analysis and trends
National homelessness acceptances have been declining steadily since the previous Homelessness Review. When the previous review commenced after the 2005/06 financial year 93,980 households had been given a full homelessness duty; by 2009/10 40,020 households were accepted, representing a reduction of 57% over the Fig. 5. period.8 Fig. 3. 80000 Acceptances
60000
40000
73360 63170 53430 40020 20000
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Regionally there has been a similar decline; when the previous Homelessness Review was published acceptances had fallen to 13,180 in the 2005/06 financial year. Since then acceptances have continued to drop, and in 2009/10 4,010 households had been accepted as homeless in the north west region, representing a reduction of 70% over the period.
Fig. 4. 12000 Acceptances 10000
8000
6000
4000
8. Accessed via 11380 8530 5490 4010 CLG website: 2000 http://tinyurl. com/29pz3cjj 0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 12 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 As can be expected from national and regional indications, homelessness acceptances have also fallen within the Greater Manchester sub-region. The graph below shows the decline in acceptances from their peak in 2004/05, to their current lowest levels. Greater Manchester has seen a similar result to regional reductions of 70%; details of these reductions are shown in the graphs and tables below: Fig. 5.
1600 Stockport 1400 Bolton 1200 Bury 1000 Manchester Oldham 800 Rochdale 600 Salford 400 Tameside Trafford 200 Wigan 0 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
The table below shows in more detail acceptances over the review period within each of the 10 Greater Manchester Boroughs:
Fig. 6. Borough 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Stockport 229 152 128 123 Bolton 436 361 288 260 Bury 344 340 129 97 Manchester 1456 912 539 482 Oldham 652 476 104 72 Rochdale 553 278 96 76 Salford 1,053 609 469 240 Tameside 140 122 39 47 Trafford 240 193 111 135 Wigan 1,054 715 481 325
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 13 Looking at the overall reduction in acceptances it is clear that there has been a large reduction in all of the 10 Greater Manchester Boroughs, including Stockport:
Fig. 7 Total reduction in acceptances 2004-2010 Percentage % Oldham 92% Tameside 92% Rochdale 90% Salford 80% Stockport 78% Bury 78% Wigan 78% Bolton 65% Manchester 65% Trafford 62%
Due to population sizes just looking at the number of acceptances can be deceiving, especially as Stockport is the third largest borough in Greater Manchester; therefore the following table shows the reduction in acceptances per 1,000 households, a figure commonly used by the CLG9:
Homeless Acceptances Data 2006-07
Fig. 8 Greater Population Homeless Reduction on Acceptances Manchester Acceptances previous year per 1,000 (GM) Authorities households Tameside 93 140 14% 1.5 Stockport 122 229 39% 1.9 Trafford 92 240 8% 2.6 Bolton 111 436 22% 3.9 Bury 77 344 4% 4.5 Rochdale 85 553 5% 6.5 Oldham 90 652 7% 7.3 9. Accessed via Manchester 197 1456 -9% 7.4 CLG website: Wigan 130 1054 -158% 8.1 http://tinyurl. com/29pz3cj Salford 97 1053 23% 10.9
14 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Homeless Acceptances Data 2007-08
Greater Population Homeless Reduction on Acceptances Manchester Acceptances previous year per 1,000 (GM) Authorities households Stockport 122 152 33% 1.2 Tameside 93 122 13% 1.3 Trafford 92 193 20% 2.1 Bolton 111 361 17% 3.3 Rochdale 85 278 50% 3.3 Bury 77 340 1% 4.4 Manchester 197 912 37% 4.6 Oldham 90 476 27% 5.3 Wigan 130 715 32% 5.5 Salford 97 609 42% 6.3
Homeless Acceptances Data 2008-09
Greater Population Homeless Reduction on Acceptances Manchester Acceptances previous year per 1,000 (GM) Authorities households Tameside 93 39 68% 0.4 Stockport 122 128 16% 1.1 Rochdale 85 96 65% 1.1 Oldham 90 104 78% 1.2 Trafford 92 111 42% 1.2 Bury 77 129 62% 1.7 Bolton 111 288 20% 2.6 Manchester 197 539 41% 2.7 Wigan 130 481 33% 3.7 Salford 97 469 23% 4.8
Homeless Acceptances Data 2009-10
Greater Population Homeless Reduction on Acceptances Manchester Acceptances previous year per 1,000 (GM) Authorities households Tameside 93 47 -20.0% 0.5 Oldham 90 72 31% 0.8 Rochdale 85 76 21% 0.9
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 15 Bury 77 97 25% 1.0 Stockport 122 123 4.00% 1.0 Trafford 92 135 -21.0% 1.5 Bolton 111 260 8% 2.3 Manchester 197 482 11% 2.5 Salford 97 240 49% 2.5 Wigan 130 325 32% 2.5
Complementing this reduction in homeless acceptances is the increase in homelessness preventions over the review period. The graph below shows that prevention cases in Stockport last year amounted to over four times the level as priority need cases that became unintentionally homeless: Fig. 9
600 515 485 Full duty 500 accepted.
378 400 314 Homelessness prevented 300 252 194 200 229 152 128 123 100 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
As can be seen, Stockport has continuously strived to prevent homelessness and reduce its level of acceptances, despite being the third largest Borough in the Greater Manchester region. More statistical analysis on homelessness within the Stockport Borough is contained later in this review.
Strategic links
The previous Stockport Homelessness Strategies have initiated discussion that homelessness does not exist in isolation from other issues, and any strategy for preventing homelessness can benefit from identifying and formulating strategic links. As mentioned previously, there are a number of local, regional and national priorities that the new strategy should strive to include. A selection of these is listed below:
16 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Stockport Local Area Agreement (LAA) 2008-11
The Stockport LAA stated Stockport’s key challenges to be building a competitive economy; creating a more socially inclusive community; and improving the quality of Stockport’s environment10. The LAA encompasses National Indicators around education, employment, safety and economy, as well as including other local indicators. Although National Indicator 156 reported by Stockport Homes has not been selected for inclusion in the designated improvement priorities, the Homelessness Strategy will still have a part to play in achieving the outcomes desired from the LAA. For example, the prevention of homelessness can have an impact on rates of crime and re-offending. There are also visible links to priorities around reducing ASB and domestic violence, as these are a common cause of homelessness; especially the latter as will be seen later in this review. Furthermore previous homelessness strategies have had links to drug and alcohol issues; addressing these is a recurring theme in the LAA.
For consideration: Formulate actions around LAA priorities / raise awareness of homelessness issues for inclusion in 2012.
Stockport Housing Needs Study 2008
The Housing Needs Study provided an overview of demand and supply of all forms of tenure in the Borough, including supported and affordable accommodation11. This study also provided projected future housing requirements based on an assessment of need, and formed the basis for planning and delivery to be furthered by the Stockport Housing Strategy. The Housing Needs Study is important to the composition of the Homelessness Strategy due to its detailed overview of the housing needs of varied groups, including those with a disability, BME residents and a range of incomes, which is useful in attempting to predict possible future trends in homelessness within the Borough.
Key points from the study include:
• The population of Stockport is projected to increase by 0.7% between 2004 and 2020, leading to increased demand for housing. • 38.8% of households in the three years leading up to 2008 were originally from out of the Borough, having moved in within this time; this is compared with 28.2% of 10. Stockport households currently in the Borough planning to leave, which shows that there has Partnership, 2008 been an increase in households of 10.6% • 52.8% of households in the Borough had incomes of less than £27,500, resulting 11.DCA / SMBC, in limited options for purchasing a property. 2008 • The average price for a property in the Borough was £198,953 at the time of the study.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 17 • 82.1% of ‘concealed households’ had incomes lower than the national average and 55.5% had less than £1,000 savings, which will hinder access to the traditional housing market. • 9.2% of households surveyed felt their home was inadequate for their needs, citing disrepair, damp and overcrowding as particular issues. • 7.3% of those living rent free (i.e. largely with friends or family, or occupying properties at no charge) were over-occupying, which could lead to homelessness issues due to overcrowding. • 14.9% of BME groups were over-occupying. • 2,076 households were estimated to be overcrowded. • 4,073 households were estimated to be in immediate housing need, projected to rise by 1,436 annually; the study also estimated an annual affordable housing shortfall of 519 units.
As this study was conducted in 2008, it is likely that the issues cited have been exacerbated since by the recession. A major concern for the Homelessness Strategy 2011 is the number of ‘concealed households’ with low incomes, low levels of savings and in 7.3% of cases high levels of overcrowding. These issues are found to be even more prominent amongst BME households, who experience over-crowding of 14.9%. This is likely to have implications on the number of people made homeless due to family breakdowns, and is compounded by the shortfall in affordable housing units being built. The number of households in the Borough is also estimated to grow, which will place further pressure on existing housing resources. The Homelessness Strategy 2011 needs to plan how it will address the needs of such overcrowded households with limited incomes, at a time with limited resources available.
For consideration: • Seek to increase the supply of affordable housing in the Stockport Borough via Strategic Housing planning, Accredited Landlords and other initiatives. • Continue existing and seek out new initiatives to tackle over-crowding, for example through under-occupation and Downsizing Schemes.
Joint strategic needs assessment
The Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA) identifies the health and wellbeing needs and inequalities of the Stockport population, and enables them to be recognised in both short and longer term strategic planning. Determinants of health and wellbeing are cited to include socio-economic, cultural and environmental conditions, including education, employment, health care and housing, as well as individual lifestyle factors and social and community networks. These factors combined support the need for a holistic approach to addressing health and social inequalities, and the establishment of a link to the Homelessness Strategy.
18 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Key challenges for Stockport identified by the JSNA based on GP registers in the Borough include:
• Child poverty: 13% in most deprived areas • Binge drinking: 52% of young adults (i.e. 16-25 year olds) drink more than twice the daily limit in one day • Drugs: 17% of young adults take drugs weekly • Smoking: 33% of young adults smoke; 16.2% overall • New parents: 25% of mothers are aged under 25 • Unemployment: 9% of 16-18s are Not in Employment, Education or Training (NEET) • Poverty: 6.4% on income related benefits • Long-term conditions: depression, hypertension, diabetes, asthma • Older poverty: 14% in most deprived areas
The JSNA supports the community strategies assessment of inequality and polarisation of deprivation; it cites life expectancy in Brinnington and Bramhall being at odds of 69 years and 81 years respectively as an example. It also finds that people in deprived areas suffer poor health sooner before the end of their life than those in affluent areas; extremes of 12 and 6 years respectively. The JSNA identifies both these, and dealing with an ageing population and increasing birth rate, as issues to consider in future planning.
For consideration: • Establish links with GP surgeries / health centres in order to publicise the Housing Options service. • Continue to develop enhanced housing options approach by partnering public health drives, employment support etc. • Increase work around drug and alcohol issues.
Stockport Housing Strategy 2010-15
The Stockport Housing Strategy and summary document, ‘A Good Place to Live’12, provides an overview of the key housing issues in Stockport and how it plans to address them. Its priorities include regeneration, improvement and investment in deprived neighbourhoods, and the actions it facilitates are of interest to the Homelessness Strategy due to the positive contribution they can have to the issues outlined by the joint strategic needs assessment. For example, investing in deprived neighbourhoods can has a positive impact on neighbour relations, a reduction in crime and an increase in residents engaged in employment or other meaningful activity. The Housing Strategy also seeks to increase the supply of affordable housing, which would 12. SMBC, 2009 have a positive impact on addressing housing need within the Borough.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 19 Stockport Housing Register and Allocations Policy Review
The Allocations Policy Review has links with Stockport Housing Strategy in finding a way to provide accommodation and choice matching the needs of residents. It has been facilitated by the Government through statutory guidance issued in 200913, which prompted the need for a review of the policy in order to promote social inclusion and sustainable, working communities. Given that homeless applicants fall in to a ‘reasonable preference’ group under allocations guidelines, and that the policy is in many ways a tool of homelessness prevention, there will be continuing links between the development of the two projects.
Stockport BME Housing Strategy / Stockport Homes Equality and Diversity Strategy
The BME Housing Strategy has not received further update or renewal since the previous Homelessness Strategy; at this time reference was made to targeting services to BME groups, and tailoring information appropriate to their circumstances. Further data on the housing conditions and socioeconomic status of BME groups will be ascertained after the 2011 census, which will occur in the life time of this strategy. At present, data is available from the 2001 Census report; about Stockport Homes’ tenants via the STATUS survey; and from diversity monitoring of homeless applications and acceptances. Association of Greater Manchester Authorities (AGMA), the Greater Manchester body, estimate the BME population to be around 6.5%, and this is reflected in allocations and lettings (6.1% of lettings via Homechoice in 2009 were to BME groups) of social housing in the Borough. This information will be analysed further in this review to understand the nature of homelessness within BME groups, and derive actions from this data.
Stockport Homes’ Equality and Diversity Strategy 2009-12 outlines four strategic priorities: maintain a corporate commitment to equality issues; know and meet customers’ needs; work in partnership with customers and stakeholders to deliver equitable services and improve social cohesion in the Borough; and be an employer who embraces diversity, with a workforce that represents and understands the community it serves14. Contributing to this strategy will mean both meeting the actions and improving customer profiling; this can be delivered within the new Homelessness Strategy.
Stockport Working Communities Strategy
13. CLG, 2009 The Working Communities Strategy describes what action Stockport Homes is going to take to help people: develop their skills and confidence; get experience 14. SHL, 2009 of work through placements and other opportunities; and apply for work and be 15 15. SHL, May supported to stay in work . The strategy has an initial focus on young people and 2009 underrepresented groups, and priority one regeneration areas in the Borough such
20 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 as Brinnington. This is because despite Stockport’s relatively high overall employment rate (80.5%)16, there are pockets of deep deprivation within the Borough. There are clear links to homelessness here, as this review and its predecessors have also found disproportionate levels of representation within these groups.
The focus on worklessness has been a recent priority for the Government, the Council and Stockport Homes, with evidence of links to crime, family breakdown and poverty. These are known contributors to homelessness, and therefore the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy will aim to develop strategic links with worklessness activity undertaken by Stockport Homes, the Council and their partners.
For consideration: Take forward recommendations within the Working Communities Strategy – for example, within temporary accommodation and P1 areas.
Stockport Homes’ Financial Inclusion Strategy
The aims of the Financial Inclusion Strategy are to promote the financial capability of Stockport Homes’ customers, leading to a reduction in associated issues such as debt, rent arrears and financial exclusion17. The strategy aims to provide links between agencies such as Stockport Council Benefits Team, the Credit Union, Debt Advice and Citizens Advice Bureau, with the intention of maximising income and preventing unmanageable levels of borrowing and debt.
There are clear links to homelessness in this strategy; preventing debt and rent arrears can also prevent the loss of existing accommodation, and maximising income can enable people to access a wider range of housing options. The Homelessness Strategy will therefore propose to work alongside the Social Inclusion Team at Stockport Homes and its partner agencies, in order to prevent homelessness due to financial difficulties.
Stockport Supporting People Strategy
Supporting People continues to be both an important partner and funding source of services within Stockport Homes. For example, during the lifetime of the previous strategy Supporting People introduced the Housing Support Point, which provides a 16. Sourced single point of referral to all short term housing related support services in Stockport. via Profiling This service has been valuable and well placed within the Housing Options Team, as a Stockport Live tool to preventing homelessness and supporting those who have found themselves in http://tinyurl. need of support. com/5uqqb6g
17. SHL, However, with the removal of the ring fence around Supporting People funding and September 2008 forthcoming budget cuts, it is anticipated that resources could become more scarce,
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 21 and competition higher than previously. As of October 2010, Supporting People were looking to make cuts of 30% over three years, which will undoubtedly have implications on the housing prospects and stability of customers requiring this support. Since then this has been re-adjusted to 11-12%, but has still to be finalised.
Increasing emphasis therefore will be placed on prevention, and providing more cost effective methods of supporting vulnerable groups such as floating rather than accommodation based support. The new Homelessness Strategy should therefore propose to build on links already formed with its partner agencies within Supporting People, and continue to maximise the use of support services and funding opportunities in order to prevent homelessness within the Borough. The demand for different types of support will be identified throughout this review.
No One Left Out: Communities Ending Rough Sleeping (National Rough Sleeping Strategy)
The outgoing Government produced this strategy with the overall target of ending rough sleeping by 2012. It created a strategic framework for preventing, assessing, supporting and reconnecting rough sleepers with services, and also funded a number of ‘Rough Sleeping Champions’. The subsequent progress reports detailed the initiatives undertaken by these Champions, from which the Stockport Homelessness Strategy can benefit from benchmarking. It also created a Small Grants Programme, from which Stockport was allocated a small sum. This small sum will accompany the formation of a rough sleeper ‘virtual team’, which will be discussed in more depth later in this review and taken forward under the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy.
Since the 2010 election the new Housing Minister has further emphasised tackling rough sleeping as a priority, although this has more to do with re-engaging rough sleepers with the community via employment and social enterprise, rather than setting targets to end street homelessness. New guidance has also expanded the criteria whereby someone is considered to be rough sleeping at official counts, which could lead to increased numbers recorded. The forthcoming Homelessness Strategy will need to take account of these priorities, and the potential for review of the way in which rough sleeper counts are undertaken.
Together We Can End Violence Against Women and Girls (National Domestic Abuse Strategy)
The recent Government Strategy, ‘Together we can end violence against women and girls’18 has placed an emphasis on prevention, protection and provision. In terms of its implications for housing, the strategy calls for closer working between the Home 18. HM Office, Police, Children’s Trust Boards and other agencies to tackle domestic violence Government, 2009 in their areas. In Stockport, a domestic violence court has been established, and it
22 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 is advisable that the Housing Options Team makes connections with this to provide a comprehensive service to victims of abuse. The N.D.A. strategy also expressed a concern about the lack of local data on domestic violence, and proposed an action plan and new national indicator set encompassing this issue; there may therefore be scope for Stockport Homes to contribute to this set via the actions set out in the Homelessness Strategy.
Teenage Pregnancy Strategy
The Stockport and national Teenage Pregnancy Strategies set the ambitious aims of reducing under 18s conceptions in Stockport by 45% by 2010, and increasing the uptake of employment, education or training by young parents by 60%. Work is still on-going on key actions from the strategy, and the Housing Options Team links in to this in providing information and advice on housing need. Most recently action with the Teenage Parents Tasking Group has seen the introduction of a care pathway to information and advice services for young people who are pregnant or already teenage parents. The Housing Options Team continues to be involved with this pathway, in the interest of preventing homelessness amongst this group, and helping to contribute to planned outcomes. Additionally Strathclyde House, the women’s Temporary Accommodation Scheme managed by Stockport Homes on behalf of the Council, has re-negotiated its contractual capacity with Supporting People to accommodate teenage parents in need of accommodation and support. Previously there were no mother and baby units in the Borough, which represents a large step forward for the services involved. The support provided will be intensive and largely undertaken by Social Care, and will undoubtedly have a positive effect on promoting planned moves and positive choices amongst this group.
Strategies around children and young people
The service remains interconnected with agencies such as Children’s Services and Connexions, so attention will continue to be paid to their own strategic priorities and service developments.
There was an especially clear focus from the outgoing Government on the assessment and accommodation of homeless 16-17 year olds, and this will form a key part of the new homelessness strategy. Following the House of Lords judgement on R(G) v Southwark LB, the CLG issued joint statutory guidance with the Department for Children, Schools and Families on the provision of accommodation for lone, homeless 16-17 year olds19. This guidance stipulated that social care were to assess and accommodate these young people under the Children Act 1989 as potentially being ‘children in need’, in all but exceptional cases. Under homelessness legislation Stockport Council in partnership with Stockport Homes will still have a duty to 19. CLG / DCSF, provide interim accommodation to any homeless 16-17 who presents themselves 2010 to the authority; however in theory the weight of on-going support and assessment
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 23 would in the majority of cases be placed upon Children’s Services. This will have implications for the demand on accommodation suitable for these young people, and resources available to providers including financial costs. The new Homelessness Strategy therefore needs to be mindful of this judgement, the statutory guidance and what strategic action can be taken to improve joint working and outcomes for young people. The Council’s Children’s Services directorate is currently working on a new commissioning strategy which will go some way to addressing this issue, and therefore it is important that housing is a partner in delivering this.
Drug and alcohol strategies
Wide ranging research has found a link between homelessness and substance misuse; this is further evidenced by monitoring of homelessness applications and acceptances in Stockport. Stockport Homes have a long established relationship with the Community Drug and Alcohol Teams, and this has proven effective in supporting both those who have become homeless, and those who have moved on into their own accommodation.
Care pathways for customers with alcohol misuse were made an action under the previous Homelessness Strategy, but due to the disbanding of groups could not be pursued. Recently services have begun considering the development of a ‘virtual group’ to support such customers, and therefore the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy should consider pursuing actions around this group once again.
Crime and disorder strategies
The previous Homelessness Strategy built strong links with agencies such as Probation and the Youth Offending Team, and saw the joint funding of a Housing Options Officer dedicated to working with offenders. Since the funding of this officer, there has been a visible reduction in re-offending levels amongst priority prolific offenders, as well as increased assistance to non-statutory (i.e. short-term sentence or first time) offenders. Their role will be looked at in more detail later in this review. Tackling crime, disorder and re-offending continues to be a priority for the Stockport Local Area Agreement, as well as key national indicators for agencies involved.
Related to crime and disorder are strategies around ASB. Stockport Homes has its own policies about tackling ASB and associated services such as witness support and domestic abuse between tenants. Whilst these are effective in many cases, there is an on-going concern that they do not always join up with homelessness services, particularly with issues such as domestic abuse. The new Homelessness Strategy therefore needs to strengthen their links, and the relationship with the Safer Stockport Partnership (SSP), and on a more concentrated scale Stockport Homes’ ASB Team, the Council’s ASBAT service, the two Family Intervention Projects (FIP and FIT) and Greater Manchester Police.
24 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Mental and physical healthcare strategies
Health has explicit links to homelessness, as demonstrated by numerous studies. Especially prevalent is the lower life expectancy and multiple health needs of rough sleepers, and the evidenced impact homelessness can have on vulnerable groups such as children.
The Housing Options Team already has a good joint working protocol with the Community Mental Health Team and wards at Stepping Hill, providing a weekly outreach service to the hospital and sitting on an accommodation panel to consider appropriate rehousing options for those with mental health issues. For physical health however links are less strong, and require research and development in the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy. For example, work already commenced on undertaking outreach to GP surgeries could be expanded.
Stockport Homes launched its own multi-agency mental health protocol for reducing evictions amongst tenants in 201020; under this early warning systems will be put in place to recognise tenants whose tenancies may be at risk in the onset of mental health decline. A possible action for the new strategy could be to expand on this, engaging partners such as RSLs and Supporting People providers.
Hospital Discharge Protocol
This particular protocol was an action under the previous Homelessness Strategy, which is largely complete but requires additional efforts to ensure it is effectively implemented. ‘Hospital to Home’, the Greater Manchester Acute NHS Trusts Homeless Discharge Protocol21 was launched in April 2010 and will continue to be a working document based upon the needs of the borough. At present locally agreed practice in relation to the protocol is still to be approved by senior health professionals. However there are already numerous initiatives in place such as a Special Needs Housing Officer visiting mental health inpatients, and a visiting officer attending general wards as required. It is recognised though that links with neighbouring hospitals are not as strong, and require improvement. By embedding the protocol as part of the Homelessness Strategy the service can further prevent unplanned discharge and returns to unsuitable accommodation across the Greater Manchester region.
Regional Homelessness Strategy
The first North West Regional Homelessness Strategy was launched in April 2008; the 20. SHL, April delivery plan has since been subject to on-going revision, most recently May 2010. A 2009 particular focus of the strategy has been to coordinate complementary activity within 21. Accessed via the North West regions, as well as informing the objectives of devolved strategies. www.shahrnw. Actions within the Regional Homelessness Strategy include reviewing each Local co.uk Authority’s own Homelessness Strategy, as well as undertaking regional audits of
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 25 move on protocols and resources to prevent homelessness.
Taking account of actions in the Regional Homelessness Strategy and Stockport’s partner authorities will enable the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy to take advantage of benchmarking, good practice, information sharing and multi-agency working. Better joint working between authorities could contribute to reducing homelessness in Stockport, by establishing reconnection protocols, information sharing and more streamlined referral paths. However, despite the new government’s promotion on sub-regional joint working funding to continue to deliver this strategy is limited, and therefore its influence and prominence as a strategic link may be less strong than in previous years.
26 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 3. Consultation
Consultation on the content and drivers for the Homelessness Strategy has been undertaken with a wide range of stakeholders, including customers, former service users, partner agencies and staff. This has been used to formulate action points for the strategy, as well as to help complete an Equalities Impact Assessment (EIA) to assess how the strategy may affect certain groups.
Customers
Customers including both current and former service-users were consulted with via a range of methods and sources over the summer months of 2010. The groups involved and key themes emerging from these consultation exercises are detailed below.
Rehousing Services “Open Afternoon”:
The Homelessness Strategy was consulted upon over sessions arranged in April and August 2010. “Open afternoons”, i.e. inviting service users to the Housing Information Centre to talk face-to-face with staff, are used by the Rehousing Services Team (Homechoice and Housing Options) as a way of consulting with what are often quite transient service users.
In the April open afternoon customers were asked to complete a short questionnaire on homelessness, the information available to them and what the focus of the next strategy should be.
What can be ascertained from this questionnaire is that the area that customers attending the afternoon felt most strongly about were recognising and addressing links to other issues, for example, debt, offending and unemployment; 86% either agreed or strongly agreed that there were links.
Areas where customers disagreed were whether information about what to do if you became homeless was well advertised (13% disagreed) and whether what happens when you make a homeless application is clearly explained and understood (13% disagreed). Looking at this in more depth, the main concerns expressed here were that some of the technical terms, for example, priority need, were not fully understood by customers. And as can be expected, some respondents were unsatisfied with outcome of their application, which is not directly related to their understanding of it.
Customers were also asked if there were any other services they would have liked to access via the Housing Options Team. Respondents chose the following:
• work; • counselling; • debt advice; and • mediation.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 27 A suggested action from this could be that the Homelessness Strategy looks to expand on existing services around mediation, and combine it with the suggestion of counselling. Debt Advice is currently provided on referral to Stockport Advice or the Citizen’s Advice Bureau; the new Homelessness Strategy could look to expand this also.
Finally customers were asked to prioritise the issues which were under consideration for inclusion in the Homelessness Strategy 2011, and did so as follows:
• Addressing youth homelessness (53% first choice) • Promoting inclusive and sustainable (working) communities (27% first choice) • Maximising housing options (for example, private sector) (20% first choice) • Partnership working (60% third choice) • Responding to the recession (for example, unemployment, debt) (13% second choice, but 73% last choice)
The Homelessness Strategy was consulted upon again at the second open afternoon; this time customers were asked:
1. What would you like to see developed in the new Homelessness Strategy? 2. What do you think the strategic priorities should be for tackling homelessness in Stockport?
When asked about developments, the majority of customers (seven) chose welfare benefits advice as something they would like to see developed within the Housing Options Team. The next most preferred options were health care advice and counselling (four votes each); legal advice and debt advice (three votes each); and employment advice and more housing options outreach surgeries (two votes each).
When asked about strategic priorities, customers were less decisive in their choices. The majority of customers (five) chose addressing rough sleeping as the main priority; this complements the priorities which have been announced by the new government so far. Four customers chose tackling domestic violence, mortgage repossessions and debt and financial problems as priorities respectively.
From both of the open afternoons the following priorities were identified:
• welfare benefit advice; • debt advice; • counselling and health care services; • rough sleeping; • domestic violence; • youth homelessness; and • repossession / eviction.
These areas will be explored in more depth later in this review, and recommendations for action put forward for development in the Homelessness Strategy 2011. 28 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Temporary Accommodation Residents’ Meetings:
The Homelessness Strategy Development Officer visited each of the Temporary Accommodation Schemes in order to gather the views and ideas of residents who had a direct experience of being homeless and going through the Housing Options service. Residents were asked for their own views on what should be developed and responded with the following:
• There is not enough support for alcohol issues; it is hard to get a Community Alcohol Team (CAT) worker or follow-up from detox. • A link worker between various agencies involved in domestic violence would be useful to ensure there is co-ordination and a better experience for victims. • There should be greater co-ordination between Stockport Homes Area Teams and the Housing Options Team in helping tenants who are fleeing violence so that they can be supported and rehoused without going into temporary accommodation, and reduce the impact on families. • The Allocations Policy should help those with a community connection or working or volunteering in an area. • Contacting tenants in arrears or having other difficulties such as drug and alcohol issues before they reach crisis point would be useful. • Younger people should have longer stays in temporary and supported accommodation to make sure they are ready for tenancies and don’t become homeless again. • There should be more ‘job swaps’ between temporary accommodation, Housing Options, Homechoice and the Area Teams to ensure all officers are able to understand each other’s roles and improve co-ordination. • There should be more security presence at the Temporary Accommodation Schemes to help residents feel safe; for example, a guard in an office at the gates and more CCTV. • Homechoice is too slow and not always accessible to customers – it would be helpful to have one person dealing with their application • Many residents are concerned about the budget and implications for benefits, funding cuts etc.
Looking at the issues raised, a clear concern for residents in temporary accommodation is ensuring there is co-ordination between services within Stockport Homes and its external stakeholders. There have already been measures implemented to bring Housing Options and Homechoice together; other services are an area for development in the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy. Residents also wanted Housing Options and Temporary Accommodation staff to be able to provide a wider range of support; for example with alcohol, benefit and financial issues. This again is something that could be developed. Some of the suggestions would be difficult to implement for legal and financial reasons; for example enforcing longer stays upon younger residents and increasing the use of CCTV in schemes. There is scope for development around this however; for example in providing more intensive support or pre-tenancy training to young tenants and changing the way their needs are assessed
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 29 in temporary accommodation. Youth homelessness will be explored in more detail later in this review.
Resettlement Focus Group:
The Resettlement Focus Group is a bi-monthly meeting between service users, with many of them having previously been through the Stockport Homes Temporary Accommodation Schemes or having been homeless. Customers were asked to consider what could have prevented them being homeless, and what could help future customers. The following responses were received:
• “If a family are falling behind with their rent, Stockport Homes could speak to the landlord and arrange a way for them to pay the arrears and not lose their home” • “Make a new advice letter which is more colourful and with more advice” • “Provide a free phone number for help” • “Make forms simpler to fill out and have someone check them” • “Financial problems can lead to non-ability to travel, make telephone calls and buy food which lead to homelessness” • “The condition of properties when taking up a tenancy can affect how well they are managed – cleanliness, furniture, carpets etc.” • “People should be able to accept lodgers when they are over 18 or students without having money problems” • “Child care support would be useful” • “Consideration to where people are housed, and their needs – for example, children they have access to”
Some of these suggestions can be implemented fairly quickly and easily and are already under consideration; for example simplifying forms and amending housing options letters to make them more appealing and easy to understand. Something which clearly emerged from this consultation however was similar to the open afternoons; customers stressed that there should be more help and advice on financial issues, welfare benefits and arrears.
Service-user questionnaire:
A questionnaire aimed at service-users who had been or were currently homeless was placed on Stockport Homes’ website and publicised to the 7,500 people on the housing register via the Housing Need and Support Service newsletter (Going Places), 11,500 households in the Stockport Homes customer newsletter (Stockport at home), Temporary Accommodation Schemes and through other service-user groups. The numbers completing this were relatively low in comparison to those attending face- to-face consultation; however all of this consultation combined is useful in assessing current need to inform the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy. Additionally, the response rate demonstrates that in terms of overall perceptions of housing need, homelessness is not currently considered to be one of the major issues amongst customers.
30 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 The majority of service-users completing the survey (73%) stated to currently be homeless; however this may be due to the large number of respondents from the Temporary Accommodation Schemes. Half of those responding stated they had been made homeless due to being asked to leave by parents; other reasons were mixed including domestic violence, loss of private sector accommodation, being asked to leave by friends and being evicted from a social housing tenancy.
Respondents were asked whether or not they had found information about the service and what to do when they became homeless well advertised; only 31% responded positively to this, suggesting that more work needs to be done on promoting the service. In response to this, respondents were asked whether they felt there were any barriers to stop people asking for help; 44% stated there were, with responses including:
• Not being sure what kind of support was available • Difficult to understand what housing options there are; things not always made clear
The Housing Options Team has taken some steps already to remedy this; for example a new suite of advice leaflets has been produced and approved by Stockport Homes’ Readers’ Group; online housing options videos have been made; and reception staff have been provided with more in depth training on housing options advice to ensure more customers can be provided with the correct advice as quickly as possible.
Respondents were also asked whether there were other issues associated with their homelessness; this was in recognition of the fact that homelessness does not exist in isolation from other social problems. Respondents cited the following: Fig. 10
4
3
2
1
0 Debts Rent/ Physical Mental Drug or Domestic ASB Offending Mortgage Health Health alcohol abuse arrears Issues Issues abuse
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 31 The responses here were similar to issues cited in previous consultation, with arrears / financial problems, mental health issues and substance misuse commonly occurring.
Relating to this, respondents were asked what help could have been given that may have helped to prevent their homelessness. A range of responses were received, with the most common being debt and financial advice, help finding employment and more floating support. Other customers also cited help with ASB and increasing joint working with both the Stockport Homes ASB Team and the Council. In support of offering customers this kind of help, respondents were also asked which other agencies they would like to see the Housing Options Team work more closely with. They chose the Job Centre, Connexions, health care and Social Services, which largely supports the above issues.
Finally customers were asked to give suggestions for how else the service could be improved, and what should be developed by the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy. Suggestions included:
• More training for staff so they better understand other services, including getting officers to ‘specialise’ in certain areas • More / quicker appointments across the Borough • More help for rough sleepers • Help finding employment • Health advice • Day centre provision for young people • Tackling violence and ASB.
Each of these areas will be addressed in more detail in Part 6 of this review, which looks at themes and associated issues.
The main recommendations drawn from customer consultation overall are detailed below:
For consideration: • Increase the capacity / knowledge base of the Housing Options Team to provide debt and welfare benefits advice. • Provide additional training to temporary accommodation staff on addressing alcohol issues, for example, counselling and detox. • Develop a joint working protocol with Housing Management / RSLs to add drug and alcohol indicators to tenancies to identify tenants at risk of eviction. • Establish links with the new domestic violence and problem solving courts in Stockport, as per customer priorities around Domestic Violence (DV). • Increase availability of Housing Options advice online and via the telephone, and in more locations – for example, by working with Stockport Advice in local centres – to make the service more accessible.
32 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Stakeholders
Consultation with stakeholders was equally wide ranging, taking on the form of presentations, questionnaires, circulation of progress reports and identification of strategic links which were detailed towards the beginning of this review.
Consultation was undertaken both within and outside the Council and Stockport Homes, with multi-agency forums such as Stockport Community Advice and Information Network (SCAIN), Stockport Homelessness Forum, Stockport Homes’ Management Team, Supporting People providers and Strategic Housing leads. Additionally, a survey was sent out to all key stakeholders from a wide range of service areas including drug and alcohol services, health, social care, the voluntary sector and offender management services. Only a small number responded to this survey, which again could be indicative of satisfaction with the previous homelessness strategy or services in Stockport, and a relative lack of concern about issues surrounding homelessness at present. Those that did respond came from a diverse range of services, including RSLs, day centres, charities, social care, services for young people and drug and alcohol services. Responses from the survey are indicated below.
As many stakeholders provide a holistic service to their service users, they were also asked what additional services they could assist with or signpost towards:
Fig. 11 6
5
4
3
2
1
0 Benefits Employment Health Counselling Advocacy Housing Legal and Financial This information was in addition to the agency stating what its contracted / specified role was, to ensure that information on provision in Stockport was accurate.
In order to gauge the demand for these services, agencies were asked to specify how many people accessed their service in the last 12 months. This varied depending on the service provided; Registered Social Landlords reported relatively low numbers
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 33 of enquiries, whilst day centres and drop-in services such as the Wellspring and MOSAIC reported over 1,000 service users. Additionally, 137 rough sleepers were reported to have been assisted; however this does not correlate similarly with the level of approaches made to the local authority, or found on rough sleeper counts. The numbers reported overall however demonstrate on-going demand for support services which can be accessed on a walk in or informal basis, especially with issues such as substance misuse and advocacy.
From the numbers provided for the aforementioned day centre and drop-in support services the proportion of service users threatened with homelessness was relatively high, at around 25-50% of all people seen. This may be due to the nature of the client group involved in these services, especially given the close association between substance misuse, social inequalities and homelessness. Specialist services such as those for ex-service personnel and care leavers reported a lower number of people threatened with homelessness, although at approximately 10% of those seen this was still a significant number. Of those approaching their services, the vast majority originated from within the Stockport Borough.
Of the people who were homeless, stakeholders cited them to have been lodging insecurely in the majority of cases, although some were cited to be rough sleeping or recently discharged from prison or the forces. Given that the responding agencies generally cater for single applicants rather than families, it is not surprising that results correspond with findings later in this review about non-priority homeless.
Of those who were threatened with homelessness, circumstances were slightly different; a larger proportion were having current difficulties with parents, or were at risk of losing a current tenancy. This gives more of an indication as to where preventative services can intervene; for example when people are leaving prison and the forces.
Stakeholders were questioned on how they help contribute towards the prevention of homelessness when this is suspected; they advised that they do liaise with the Council / Stockport Homes on a range of issues, and in some cases offer mediation and deposit schemes as well as support and advocacy.
Complementing later findings in this review, stakeholders were asked to comment on what associated issues they found their service users to have alongside their reason for approaching them.
34 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Fig. 12 6
5
4
3
2
1
0 Physical health Mental health Learning Drug issues Alcohol Debts or issues issues diffuculties issues arrears As at least one of the respondents was a drug / alcohol support service, so issues cited with substance misuse were anticipated; however, of note is the number of service users cited to have debt or rent arrears, demonstrating a need for more investigation and support in this area.
To indicate how the Homelessness Strategy could work together with key stakeholders in the Borough, they were asked what their own priorities were for the next five years. Answers included:
• Developing and prioritising their own Housing Options Team • Reducing the harm caused by drug and alcohol use on the whole family • Providing affordable housing to vulnerable groups • Ensuring sufficient accommodation is available to young people • Ensuring those leaving the forces do not become homeless • Reducing street homelessness / rough sleeping
There are clear links between these priorities and what the Homelessness Strategy can develop; for example in tackling rough sleeping, youth homelessness and expanding the enhanced housing options agenda. Alongside this, stakeholders stated they could incorporate several areas identified within this Review in their business planning. Tackling financial exclusion and worklessness were high on the agenda for most agencies in the Borough; this will be especially important given forthcoming welfare benefit reductions and back to work initiatives announced by the new Government. Accompanying this, nearly all stakeholders responded that they had concerns about future sources of funding, and being able to meet future demand.
In planning to meet unmet need and the associated issues of people threatened with homelessness in Stockport, stakeholders identified the following areas of importance: • Mental health services
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 35 • Extra care • Emergency housing for young people • Substance misuse • Those with multiple issues, for example, substance misuse but also with mental health issues
Increasing the supply of emergency and other housing is a matter for consideration on a strategic level, for example by Supporting People. Although it is difficult to estimate how much priority or finance will be afforded to vulnerable homeless groups, this Review and evidence submitted by stakeholders is important in assessing where scarce resources should be targeted.
Other comments made by stakeholders include reviewing age restrictions to enable young people to access a wider range of areas through Homechoice. This is something which is being considered by the coinciding Allocations Review, and will be explored later in this review. Additionally stakeholders, although positive about the relationship between the Housing Options Team and their services, suggested that there could be more outreach by Housing Options Officers to ensure that vulnerable and excluded groups are encouraged and able to access the service. For example the aforementioned rough sleepers, customers with mental health problems and those leaving institutions such as prison, hospital and the forces. A great deal of work is already undertaken with these groups; for example through the Housing Options Officer for offenders, and the Special Needs Housing Officer. However the service recognises that these groups have persisting and diverse needs, which should be addressed through partnership working and actions within the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy.
For consideration: • Increase outreach surgeries across the Borough. • Implement and support recommendations from Allocations Policy Review around worklessness and age restrictions. • Investigate joint working with other stakeholders, including RSLs, around worklessness and financial exclusion. • Research the feasibility of sourcing and potentially funding additional mental health or counselling services.
Elected Representatives and Board Members
Elected representatives in Stockport include Councillors, members of the Stockport Homes Board and the Stockport Homes Tenants Federation. These representatives were asked for their views in a number of ways, including articles in related newsletters such as the Board Bulletin and Stockport Review, communication via meetings and email, and a questionnaire.
These groups totalled 78 individuals, with only four responding to the survey, reporting
36 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 to receive one or two enquiries about homelessness each month. The types of enquiries were mainly around the allocation of social housing, but one Councillor did report concerns about affordability which could lead to homelessness, especially amongst private tenants. When asked about what kind of support the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy should provide and to which groups, Councillor responses included:
• Young people and enhancing mediation services • People who are ‘sofa surfing’, and providing floating support to this group • People leaving prison • People with multiple debts / arrears / affordability issues • People with mental health issues / chaotic lifestyles
The volume of responses does not show an overwhelming concern from elected or Board members about homelessness issues; this is reflective of the positive work to improve the visibility and accessibility of the services in Stockport over the last Homelessness Strategy. Some of the issues cited will be explored in the Allocations Review; however the recurring themes of tackling youth homelessness, complex needs and affordability issues need to be considered in the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 37 4. Discussion and findings: Part A, Overview
Achievements
Particular achievements and awards under the lifetime of the previous Homelessness Strategy included:
• Maintaining a three star service at Audit Commission re-inspection, where homelessness was once again cited as “an area of significant strength” • Stockport Homes’ homelessness services cited as an overall Arms Length Management Organisation (ALMO) area of strength by the Audit Commission’s Key Lines of Enquiry (KLOE) best performers table • All Temporary Accommodation Schemes graded ‘Level A’ at Supporting People inspection in 2008 • Achieving National Indicator 156 a year and a half early, and exceeding this target by the end of the 2009/10 financial year
Further to these awards, the Homelessness Strategy through joint working with its partners also saw the development of several new services and initiatives with the aim of preventing homelessness and supporting vulnerable service users to maintain their homes. Relating to points within the previous strategy, these included:
Fig. 13 Description Progress Further develop rough sleeping outreach In April 2010 £3,000 Stockport Homes and support work to achieve reductions received from the CLG to assist with in rough sleeping BVPI 202 addressing the complex needs of rough sleepers. Work with Housing Strategy to increase NI155 three year cumulative target the amount of social and affordable achieved. Stockport Homes built their housing within the Borough first properties at Lantern Close in Brinnington. Work commenced on more new Stockport Homes properties at Mendip / Marlhill sites. Further develop link-work with feeder Probation, Supporting People and prisons Stockport Homes funding housing post within Housing Options to work with Offenders. Continue to improve the standard of Play and Development Workers are temporary accommodation and support now employed at the families scheme for homeless families to provide support and motivation to children resident at the scheme. Skills for Life courses made available to all residents, as well as additional training and skills delivered within the schemes. New kitchens and bathrooms have been fitted in consultation with residents.
38 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Implement relevant recommendations The Housing Options team spent of the forthcoming Housing and Mental 2008-09 working with Mental Health Health Strategy Services to implement recommendations from the Housing and Mental Health Strategy, including starting the process of establishing an alerter and intervention protocol to prevent those with mental ill-health losing their Stockport Homes accommodation. Work to minimise the risk of increased A CLG funded Housing Options Officer homelessness from the owner-occupier for repossessions recruited by the sector, for example, debt and mortgage Housing Options Team, exploring the full advice campaigns range of mortgage rescue initiatives and administering repossessions prevention fund. Improved access to tenancy sustainment Rent Arrears Protocol developed with initiatives Stockport Homes’ Customer Finance Team and Resettlement Services help prevent homelessness from Stockport Homes’ accommodation. Family Intervention Project piloted working with families with multiple needs at risk of homelessness. Introduce a ‘sanctuary’ scheme An enhanced ‘sanctuary’ scheme has been introduced. Stockport Homes have committed £20,000 and RSLs have signed up to a cross-tenure scheme. Improve re-housing systems Changes made in Allocations to encourage maximum use of Policy Review to maximise use of Supporting People funded Temporary Supporting People funded temporary Accommodation Schemes accommodation schemes. Move on Strategy Produced by the Council with recommendations made. Explore regional choice based lettings ‘Pinpoint’ the Regional Choice-Based across Greater Manchester to increase Lettings Scheme across Greater choice / options Manchester has been established, with Stockport being a partner agency.
Each of these initiatives has contributed to the reduction of homelessness and improvement of services in several ways, including: sustaining tenancies; increasing move on options from temporary accommodation; making the service more accessible; and enhancing partnership working.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 39 Details of partnership working
The Housing Options Team is the main delivery vehicle for many of the Council’s actions relating to homelessness. However, it realises that partnership working is crucial to success in preventing homelessness in the borough, as demonstrated by the achievements listed above. Partners throughout the previous strategy have included:
Fig. 14 Partner agency Activity Stockport Primary Care Trust A Primary Care Health Trust worker attends Temporary Accommodation Schemes to offer services to residents on health care issues Community Drugs / Alcohol Teams Dedicated drug and alcohol workers attend temporary accommodation schemes to offer advice on treatment, alternative therapies and improved pathways between housing and other services Mental Health Team A Special Needs Housing Officer attends hospital inpatient wards on a weekly basis. A Mental Health and Housing Panel is also in operation to ensure customers with higher support needs can access suitable accommodation and support Housing Benefit Team Housing Benefit verification training is provided to staff within Rehousing Services.Housing Benefit joint working protocol ensures claims can be fast tracked for residents in Temporary Accommodation Schemes and other urgent cases Debt Advice Advice for customers experiencing unsustainable debt issues and budgeting problems. Representation at court hearings and negotiation with lenders. Two way referral with Housing Options for schemes such as Mortgage Rescue and addressing tenancy arrears, and funding from Stockport Homes’ Customer Finance Team towards additional advice for Stockport Homes’ tenants.
40 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Welfare Rights Advice on entitlement to Welfare Benefits; representation and support at appeals and tribunals. Connexions Cross referral of young people with accommodation and support needs. Advice and advocacy for young people within the Temporary Accommodation Schemes. Stockport Social Care Advice and support for concerns about child welfare (via CAF system). Advice and support for the protection of vulnerable adults. Joint working protocols around assessment and support for homeless 16-17 year olds, and rehousing of those leaving care Stockport Women’s Aid (SWA) A dedicated Housing Options Officer conducts fortnightly outreach surgeries to women currently in the refuge. SWA provide floating support and advice to customers experiencing domestic violence Multi-Agency Risk Assessment (MARAC) Brings together a range of agencies to share intelligence and co-ordinate support of those experiencing domestic abuse Probation / YOT Referral of offenders under Probation supervision and in housing need to a dedicated Housing Options Officer. Coordination of rehousing, risk assessments and supervision. Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) Providing independent advice on a wide range of subjects.Referral to sources of Legal Aid.
There are a number of other agencies which the Housing Options Team has close working relationships with; for instance internally there are strong links with the Resettlement and Asylum Teams, and Customer Finance Team. Additionally these and other agencies carry out their own preventative initiatives; for example through addressing ASB and undertaking mediation in-house. All of these relationships are a result of identifying the needs of customers, and trying to prevent homelessness through intervention at the earliest stage.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 41 Evaluation of current tools
Homelessness in Stockport is prevented and relieved using a variety of tools and resources, which have expanded over time. The following offers an overview of the effectiveness of current commonly used tools.
Housing Options interviews
Interviews are undertaken by Housing Options Officers with the primary goals of delivering effective and comprehensive housing advice, and preventing homelessness. Demand for the service has been consistently high over the review period:
Fig. 15 Year Number of interviews 2006/07 1,860 2007/08 1,397 2008/09 1,571 2009/10 1,480 (1,918 including outreach)
It is worth noting that not all enquiries to the Housing Options Team are recorded as being interviewed at the Housing Information Centre; therefore these numbers do not reflect overall demand for the service. Housing Options Officers also give advice via telephone, email and letter, where in many cases housing issues can be resolved without the need for a full interview. Last year the Housing Options Team alone took 18,496 calls, and many more were made to the Council’s Stockport Advice Service and other partner agencies. Various housing outreach surgeries are also undertaken, such as the Wellspring, prisons and Probation, Supporting People providers and hospitals. For example, 41 people were given housing options advice at Stepping Hill’s mental health wards last year, 97 people were interviewed at the Wellspring and over 300 offenders were assisted via Probation and prisons throughout 2009/10. Including these two outreach surgeries, the Housing Options Team interviewed 1,918 people last year. These outreach surgeries will be explored in more depth within this review.
Mediation
The Stockport Homes Mediation Scheme is a well established homelessness prevention tool, having been in operation since June 2004. The scheme is available to applicants of any age who are currently experiencing difficulties with their parents, guardians or hosts which may render them homeless if unresolved. Mediation is more than simply asking the family or host to allow the person to remain; it seeks to maintain their accommodation and relationships via advice and assistance on a number of issues such as finance, benefits, employment, education and housing options advice. Additionally it recognises that in many cases it is better for the person to remain within their family home; for example in cases involving young people not yet ready for independence, or those requiring additional support which is best provided by their
42 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 family such as young parents.
Applications to the scheme have increased over the review period:
Fig. 16 500
400
300
200
100
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 The peak in mediation cases in 2008/09 can be partly attributed to Supporting People funding an additional Mediation Worker over this period, who was able to expand the capacity and outreach capability of the service as well as undertaking promotional and advice work with schools and stakeholders.
The success rate of the scheme is also largely positive:
Fig. 17 Year Mediated home to family / friends 2006/07 198 (91%) 2007/08 241 (83%) 2008/09 401 (88%) 2009/10 353 (88%)
The Mediation Scheme therefore continues to be a vital tool of homelessness prevention. However there are risks to its future effectiveness, such as forthcoming benefit cuts and potential outcomes of the allocations review, which may mean more families asking adult children to leave. These risks will be explored later in this review and action points drawn for the forthcoming homelessness strategy to safeguard the scheme’s on-going success.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 43 Deposit Scheme
The Stockport Homes Deposit Scheme has been in operation since 2005, and has proved successful with households threatened with homelessness in the Borough. The popularity of the scheme has resulted in an increase in the volume of applications since the previous homelessness strategy in 2007. In 2009/10, 487 applications were processed and 119 Deposit Scheme Agreements were issued; this is a marked increase on previous years but a slight decline on 2008/09, when criteria for the scheme were tightened. Fig. 18 200
150
100
50
0
2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 The tightening of criteria included restricting the scheme to applicants in priority need, only issuing bonds to households who were threatened with homelessness, and also restricting it to applicants currently residing in the Stockport borough or having fled domestic violence. The reason for this tightening of criteria was to ease the pressure on the scheme’s financial and administrative resources, whilst targeting the most vulnerable groups where not having the scheme would lead to a full homelessness duty. Limiting the number of applications also meant that more signups could be undertaken with those who were eligible, contributing to the effectiveness of the scheme. In 2009/10, 24.43% of applications resulted in signups; this is compared to 14.95% in the previous year.
44 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Fig. 19
1400 Applications 1200 Deposit Agreements
1000
800
600
400 Deposit Agreements No.s of Applications and 200
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 The increase in demand has led to the employment of an additional Deposit Scheme Worker and enhanced liaison with landlords and the Housing Benefit team. Resultant improvements include a greater ability to ‘match’ tenants with suitable landlords and properties; an increased capacity to provide resettlement support and advice; and safeguarding Housing Benefit payments for all tenants subject to a Deposit Scheme agreement. This has led to a decrease in the proportion of claims compared to the value of Deposit Scheme agreements issued, as more efforts are concentrated into helping customers sustain their tenancies.
Fig. 20 Year Value of bonds Cost of claims Claims as a % of values 06-07 £31,454.32 £8601.00 27.34% 07-08 £29,957.00 £7285.00 24.32% 08-09 £105,012.66 £17,205.11 16.38% 09-10 £64,723.00 £2836.54 4.38%
Customer experiences of the Deposit Scheme are surveyed on a yearly basis, reporting positively on the sustainability of tenancies. For example, of 13 responses received in October / November 2009 from customers nearing the end of their Deposit Scheme agreement, only two had failed to save up the cash deposit required to replace the scheme. In some instances landlords have been willing to forego a cash deposit given good experiences with the tenant; in others the Deposit Scheme is able to issue another short term bond to give the tenant more time to save the money, or negotiate a lower cash deposit with the landlord on large properties.
In order to meet unmet demand and limited rehousing options in some non-priority households, Probation has also begun working with the Deposit Scheme in the last 12 months in order to rehouse customers currently on license. Through this agreement
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 45 Probation have committed £13,000 of funding to help with rent in advance and agency fees, on the proviso that the Deposit Scheme is issued to such customers. 10 ex-offenders were rehoused via this relationship in 2009/10, drawing on £4198.47 of the funding; this scheme therefore will continue to be viable for some time with the remaining monies.
Due the intensive administrative and financial input required to maintain the scheme to this level, there are risks to its effectiveness given the forthcoming budget cuts. Having already restricted the scheme to applicants in priority need, the scheme cannot realistically afford to limit itself further without having a detrimental impact on the number of homelessness acceptances and National Indicator 156, i.e. number of priority need households needing temporary accommodation.
Exceptional Payment Fund
Stockport Homes’ Housing Options Team has operated an Exceptional Payment Fund, or ‘homelessness prevention fund’ as otherwise known, since the beginning of the 2008/09 financial year. The CLG recommended the introduction of such a fund as a ‘spend to save’ initiative to prevent homelessness. Flexibility is encouraged in the scheme; examples cited through benchmarking with other Greater Manchester local authorities have found funds being used for scenarios such as meeting a temporary shortfall in Local Housing Allowance where a Discretionary Housing Payment has been declined; clearing gardens and undertaking repairs to prevent tenants being evicted; and covering administration fees to secure private tenancies22.
In Stockport the scheme has had the same flexible criteria, but has only been drawn upon so far to provide rent in advance, agency fees, a small number of cash deposits and to clear arrears to stop the threat of eviction. In the past two years £45,222.34 has been drawn from the fund, preventing homelessness for 75 customers. Following the progress of these customers, 45 (60%) remain in their current homes with no further threat of homelessness reported to the Housing Options Team. 8 (11%) have moved on to other settled accommodation. 15 (20%) have left their accommodation, but without re-presenting to the Housing Options Team as threatened with homelessness. 9 (12%) customers have re-contacted the Housing Options Team with further housing issues; these mainly involve rent arrears or section 21 notices from landlords, which are being dealt with by Housing Options Officers. The positive outcome for this last group is that they are aware of who to contact should they experience issues with their accommodation. Only one of these 9 customers has actually gone on to become homeless and have a duty accepted towards them.
22. The Exceptional Payment Fund has clearly been a valuable tool for preventing Benchmarking homelessness, with the above evidence that only one of its recipients has since undertaken with responses from become homeless. However, given forthcoming cuts to budgets and changes in Salford, Oldham government priorities, such a large fund in future may not be sustainable. To date, and Trafford, only £1,992 has been repaid on loans made from the fund, which amounts to only February 2010 4% of the amount spent. Although this was a ‘spend to save’ initiative, the collection
46 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 of outstanding loans is crucial to ensuring its future viability. Initiatives currently being investigated include negotiation with the Housing Benefit Team to recuperate rent in advance if tenancies come to an end; this is based on the fact that Housing Benefit is paid in arrears at the end of each month, meaning that where rent in advance was issued the final month’s payment will be surplus. Housing Options Officers are also being instructed to actively encourage those who were issued loans to set up repayment plans, with the assistance of Debt Advice / CAB if there are financial issues preventing this from being possible.
For consideration: • Implement measures to recuperate previous Exceptional Payment Fund loans, for example, building on work already started with Housing Benefit Team • Seek new sources to continue this fund, e.g. accessing alternative grant sources to assist customers in crisis situations
Housing Support Point
The Housing Support Point was established in December 2008, providing a single point of access for all housing related support services in Stockport. Commissioned by Supporting People, its aim is to ensure that placements are offered to those most in need, as well as reducing the bureaucracy of filling in multiple forms for Supporting People funded services in the borough.
The service received a total of 962 referrals in its first full financial year (April 2009-March 2010). These were requesting housing related support in the following most common areas:
Fig. 21
250
200
150
100
50
0 Homelessness Floating Offenders Mental Young Teen Physical Learning Support Health people parents disabilities difficulties
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 47 The large numbers of applicants seeking support due to homelessness is in part due to access to Stockport Homes’ temporary accommodation schemes being routed through the Housing Support Point, and these schemes having a larger throughput of residents than other services. There is a similar explanation for the high volume of applications for generic floating support, as Stockport Homes’ Resettlement fall in this bracket.
Despite most applicants attempting to access homelessness and generic floating support services, Housing Support Point also monitors secondary needs for which the applicant may need assistance. The most common issues cited by applicants are: Fig. 22
100
80
60
40
20
0 Offending Mental health Alcohol problems Drug problems Learning disabilities From the nature of referrals received the Housing Support Point is able to identify demand and gaps in service provision, which can be used to inform the homelessness strategy as well as those developed by other agencies. Clearly there is demand for services supporting offenders; however this was addressed in the lifetime of the previous strategy by GMOP, Threshold floating support and the Housing Options Officer for offenders. Mental health and drug and alcohol issues continue to be a problem; although there are several agencies providing support in these areas, criteria for some services are restrictive so those with lower level needs are not always eligible for support. There is currently no housing related support provision directly for those with drug and alcohol issues, although the Community Drugs and Alcohol Teams and Mosaic can provide support.
The Housing Support Point is useful in gauging demand for services and simplifying the application process for vulnerable people, but does have limited control over referral outcomes. The evidence it gathers however is directed towards the Supporting People Team, who are in the process of reviewing funding and contracts across all services; the outcomes of this will be used to formulate actions for the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy.
48 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Offender services
Joint funding from Probation, Supporting People and Stockport Homes enabled a Housing Options Officer to move into post administering the Stockport Housing Offender Service. This scheme not only works with Priority Prolific Offenders, but also non-statutory offenders who have served sentences of less than 12 months; engagement with this group is uncommon in most offender support services but in Stockport it is realised that without support this group is unlikely to sustain accommodation and may go on to re-offend. Better co-ordination between offender management services to prevent and relieve homelessness, especially upon discharge from prison, had been an action point in the previous homelessness strategy which has been achieved and arguably exceeded. This is demonstrable via the outcomes below, bearing in mind the previous agency charged with providing the service only rehoused one person within the year they operated.
During 2009-10 housing surgeries were established at HMP Forrest Bank and improved links embedded with HMP Manchester, and as a result 10% of referrals were received via prison. All but one of these prisoners were visited in advance of their release from custody, on at least one occasion.
Key outcomes from the first year of this service include:
• A dedicated worker provides outreach to prisons, Youth Offending Team, and licensed premises across Greater Manchester and the North West. This service is based within Stockport probation one day per week. This allows for greater information sharing and joint working. • Cost effective – especially compared with accommodation based services. • Over 300 offenders assisted with housing advice. • Over 80 offenders housed into a variety of accommodation. • The service forms the ‘housing’ element of the multi-agency ‘Spotlight’ integrated offender management initiative. This deals with high risk and Priority and Prolific Offenders and has reported a 38.5% reduction in offending levels for their target group.
Where required offenders have been provided with support to enable them to maintain their tenancies and from those offenders who were rehoused into independent accommodation, 74% engaged successfully with floating support services.
Out of the offenders successfully accommodated, 10% were non-statutory cases (i.e. offenders with sentences less than 12 months); it is important to try and target this group of offenders in order to really address re-offending rates. This group contribute significantly to the prison population and have relatively high re-offending rates which are linked, in part, to a lack of accommodation, education, employment or training.
There is a risk to the delivery of this service in the forthcoming years of the strategy due to the removal of the ring-fence around Supporting People funds, and budget
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 49 cuts anticipated by the council, Ministry of Justice and Stockport Homes. Given the outcomes achieved in the first year however, Stockport will continue to encourage the agencies involved to retain their commitment to the service.
Employment Support Officer
The role of Employment Support Officer is still relatively new within Stockport Homes, and therefore the process of embedding this is on-going. The Employment Support Officer role has been funded by income generated by the collection of water charges by Stockport Homes, and the officer has been in post since August 2009. The purpose of the officer is to signpost customers towards employment, training, education and volunteering opportunities, as well as utilising a ‘worklessness toolkit’ to encourage other agencies to do the same. Due to the on-going nature of such work, actions and outcomes are still being assessed; however based on a snapshot of customers over December 2009 and March 2010, outcomes were as follows:
Fig. 23 Customers in education: 9 Employment: 17 Volunteering: 2 Total: 28
125 service-users have been supported by the Employment Support Officer with searching and applying for employment and training opportunities. 22% of these have had successful outcomes so far, and other cases are on-going to be signposted to opportunities when they arise.
The Employment Support Officer has been working to build up relationships with the Temporary Accommodation Schemes, Supporting People providers and Stockport Homes’ tenants through one to one appointments and informal advice surgeries. An important reason for targeting these groups is to ensure that current and future tenancies do not break down due to financial exclusion and worklessness. The links between homelessness and worklessness are well documented, and will be explored further in part C, (Education, skills and employment) of the discussions and findings of this document.
Help for Homeowners
Stockport Homes received funding via the CLG in 2009 to employ a dedicated officer (in post from January 2010) to assist homeowners who may be struggling to keep up with their mortgage repayments in the current economic climate. Additionally, a Repossessions Prevention Fund was allocated to help prevent homelessness by offering small loans as part of negotiation with mortgage lenders over arrears. The role of this officer has since been expanded to encompass tenants affected by the economic downturn.
50 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 The introduction of the national mortgage pre-action protocol in late 2009 which stipulated that lenders must notify the relevant local authority before repossession action can be taken to court has led to a significant volume of homeowners being offered advice and assistance from an early stage in repossession proceedings. In all cases where lender notification is received, the Housing Options Officer will attempt to contact the household via telephone or home visits, with letters sent where this has been unsuccessful.
The following table gives an indication on the volume and nature of referrals received in the officer’s first six months. It also gives an indication of the demand for, and use of, mortgage relief offered by the outgoing government.
Fig. 24 Total number of enquiries: 219 Of which self-referrals: 52 Of which lender notification: 167 Interviews undertaken: 45 Referrals – Debt Advice: 18 Referrals – Mortgage Rescue Scheme: 13 Referrals – Support for Mortgage Interest: 9 Referrals – Homeowners Mortgage Support: 1
These statistics show that despite the high numbers of referrals received as a result of the national pre-action protocol and increased publicity of the help which can be provided, 79% of homeowners at risk of repossession do not respond to pro-active efforts to contact them. Every effort is made to ensure that homeowners are aware of where they can get help; for example the service is publicised in the Homechoice advert, in various newsletters, and via posters and leaflets throughout information and advice services. As mentioned previously, the officer also visits each household where a notification is received, or makes other forms of contact if this is unsuccessful.
This lack of response may be due to homeowners resolving their own difficulties, but also there remain a number of households who continue to not face up to their circumstances, and concerted efforts need to be made to engage this group as early as possible in the repossession process.
The amount of cases interviewed and prevented (either through direct assistance or general advice from the service) from becoming homeless is increasing, showing the positive effect seeking advice can have on households. In the first six months of 2010 the officer has already managed to intervene in 45 cases – this is compared to 29 in the whole of 2009. It is clear therefore that the assistance provided by this officer is invaluable in preventing repossessions and homelessness.
Where interviews have been undertaken, households are offered a range of prevention options dependant on their personal circumstances such as those detailed in the table above. Additionally the officer undertakes extensive negotiation with lenders,
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 51 which can often negate the need to apply to these schemes – for example they make representations in court, and agree affordable repayment plans between lenders and homeowners to prevent repossessions going ahead. Unfortunately some households do disengage from the service; however all attempts are made to discourage this from happening. Of outcomes known from closed cases in January-June 2010:
Fig. 25 Repossession prevented: 7 Live application with the Mortgage Rescue Scheme: 9 Completed Mortgage Rescue: 2 Rehoused: 8 Prevention Fund utilised: 4
Other cases remain open pending outcomes of repossession action, and to provide on-going support to households at risk of homelessness. A risk to this current service provision is that funding may not be continued past this year; however it is hoped that contingencies could be developed around this, such as utilising the remaining Repossessions Prevention Fund.
Referrals to other services
Referrals to other services also form a valuable element of homelessness prevention. Based on a snapshot of recorded referrals from June 2009-December 2009, Housing Options Officers referred customers to the following services: Fig. 26
Debt Advice 13% 33% Welfare Rights 5% Social Care 5% Women’s Aid
12% Drug / Alcohol services 15% 17% Housing Standards Other
As can be gathered from this chart, half of the customers presenting to the Housing Options Team who warranted further referral to other agencies had debt and welfare benefit issues. Other prominent concerns included child welfare and personal safety, especially where applicants were subject to domestic abuse. ‘Other’ involves several
52 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 agencies to which referrals were made, including Housing Standards / Environmental Health; voluntary organisations such as the Wellspring and Furniture Station; and other bodies providing services for specific groups such as Refugee Action. The diversity of services in Stockport is clearly a positive tool in homelessness prevention, although waiting lists can on occasion be lengthy, or in some cases out of borough referrals are required.
This snapshot of referrals only gives a small demonstration of the nature of homelessness in Stockport; more robust monitoring of referrals and signposting may give a clearer picture of demand, including that which is currently unmet. Where common themes have been identified however there is a need for further investigation of the expansion of services and early intervention to prevent homelessness; for example, in providing Housing Options Officers with more in depth knowledge of debt and welfare benefits.
For consideration: Undertake gap analysis of advice and assistance services (in partnership with SCAIN) in all sectors (for example, voluntary, community groups, private etc.) in Stockport and take forward recommendations in the Homelessness Strategy.
Out of Hours Service
Stockport Homes operates a housing standby service to deal with any housing related emergencies and issues which may occur outside of office hours. The telephone number is publicised in both the Housing Information Centre and on the Stockport Homes website, but calls are also received from other agencies including the Police, Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council’s Contact Centre and Stepping Hill Hospital. The purpose of the service is to provide advice and if necessary temporary accommodation to customers in an emergency situation, for example homelessness or urgent repairs. Where the call is not deemed to be of an urgent nature, the customer will be signposted towards the relevant department or agency for the next working day.
The number of calls to the out of hours service had been declining over the review period; this could be cited as a result of the increased prevention work carried out by the Housing Options Team, and the accessibility of the remodelled housing information centre and area offices negating the need for out of hours enquiries. Additionally where the service previously handled repairs calls, these are now dealt with by a designated contact centre.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 53 Fig. 27
300 Calls Homelessness enquiry 250
200
150
100
50
0 2006/7 2007/8 2008/9 2009/10
However, despite the number of calls to the out of hours service falling overall, there have been more calls proportionately relating to homelessness towards the latter end of the review period. In the 2007 Homelessness Review only 45% of calls related to homelessness, whereas in the last financial year this was 72% of calls. The increased proportion of calls out of hours for the Housing Options Team gives an indication that demand for the service remains high, further reflecting the increase in Housing Options Interviews detailed earlier. It also raises a concern that the Housing Options Team is not universally well known amongst customers and referring agencies, as many of these calls should and can be resolved during normal office hours.
Fig. 28 Year Total No. of Calls Main Issue: % Homeless 2009/2010 168 121 72% 2008/2009 183 145 79% 2007/2008 201 126 63% 2006/2007 265 162 61%
54 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 The following chart shows the most common sources of referrals in each year of the review: Fig. 29
140
120 2006/07
100 2007/08
80 2008/09
60 2009/10 40
20
Contact Social Police Hospital SHL Service centre services department user It is clear that the out of hours service is well known and used by the contact centre and social services, through which customer calls are directed; enquiries from these agencies are usually to do with repairs and homelessness advice. As a result there is a relatively low volume of calls from service users directly. There is also a good deal of publicity around what to do which may prevent customers from calling the service out of hours unnecessarily; for example voicemail and email messages, posters, information in officer etc.
Outreach surgery: the Wellspring
The Housing Options Team at Stockport Homes has a history of joint working with the Wellspring, a local resource centre for homeless and disadvantaged / socially excluded people. This service operates a day centre offering food, clothing, and educational resources, as well as healthcare services via a local PCT nurse and outreach GP. The Wellspring also offers advocacy and referral pathways into housing and associated services. In the last year the service reports to have assisted over 1,000 people, although it is unclear whether these constitute individual service users or multiple visits.
The Housing Options Team and the Wellspring formalised their joint working under a protocol in October 2009, and from this a weekly outreach surgery is now undertaken 23. Data correct as of 6th August at the Wellspring building by Housing Options staff. Since commencement, officers at 2010 this surgery have provided advice and assistance to almost 100 people23.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 55 The enquiries have been in the following areas: Fig. 29 35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0 Homechoice Homeless- Rent arrears Tenancy Housing Relocation Other ness issues options Where enquiries have been recorded as ‘other’, these include benefit advice, help finding employment and referrals to other agencies such as the Furniture Station. As can be gathered from the chart above the majority of service-users are not reporting as homeless; a significant proportion of enquiries have come from current tenants with issues such as ASB and repairs (21 cases; 20% of cases seen).This information should therefore be passed to Housing Management for consideration of involvement with the Wellspring.
Overall 18 people (17% of cases seen) made homelessness presentations via the Wellspring surgery and were referred to the Housing Options Team for further support. This is slightly lower than the number the Wellspring reported to be homeless and using their facilities in the stakeholder questionnaire (approximately 25%); this may be due to some of their service users being transient and difficult to track down, or because they have chosen to present as homeless in another local authority. Supporting this 6 people (6%) sought advice on presenting homeless to a different borough, either due to having no connection with Stockport or wishing to relocate. The outreach surgery therefore continues to provide a valuable service, but could be further enhanced through the attendance of related parties such as Housing Management or complementary services such as the Employment Support Officer or Social Inclusion Team.
Other records from the Wellspring suggest that 137 people reported themselves to be sleeping rough to this service in the past year. This is contrary to the numbers recorded in multi-agency counts and presentations to the Housing Options Team; therefore increase joint working or intelligence sharing needs to be explored, most likely through the official rough sleeper count planned for late 2010.
56 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 5. Discussion and findings: Part B, Statistical analysis: Main causes of homelessness
Main reasons for homelessness acceptances
In the last homelessness review an applicant being asked to leave by their parents was the most common reason for homelessness, followed by termination of assured shorthold tenancy. Both of these were above the national average as a proportion of homeless acceptances, and thus tackling them became a key focus of the Homelessness Strategy.
Since 2005/06 there has been a decrease in homelessness acceptances, as has already been explored, but also a change in the reasons for this. The table below shows the five main causes of homelessness in Stockport in 2009/10, and national comparisons. Fig. 30 Cause of Stockport National Local variance homelessness against national Domestic violence 24 (20%) 5707 (14%) +6% Asked to leave by 21 (17%) 8746 (22%) -5% parents Asked to leave by 10 (8%) 4994 (12%) -2% other relatives / friends Termination of 12 (10%) 4596 (11%) +1% assured shorthold Required to 7 (6%) 1760 (4%) +2% leave NASS accommodation
Fig. 31
25% Local 20% National
15%
10%
5%
0% Domestic Parents Relatives Tenancy NASS violence
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 57 This is compared to the local and national situation in 2006/07: Fig. 32 Cause of Stockport National Local variance homelessness against national Domestic violence 47 (21%) 9,770 (13%) +8% Asked to leave by 61 (27%) 17,000 (23%) +4% parents Asked to leave by 17 (8%) 10,170 (14%) -6% other relatives / friends Termination of 25 (11%) 10,280 (14%) -3% assured shorthold Required to 4 (2%) 960 (1%) +1% leave NASS accommodation Fig. 33
30% Local 25% National
20%
15%
10%
5%
0% Domestic Parents Relatives Tenancy NASS violence
Over the period of this Homelessness Review therefore, the overall change in reasons for homelessness acceptances locally and nationally has been: Fig. 34 Cause of homelessness Stockport change National change 2006- 2006/07 – 2009/10 07 – 2009/10 Domestic Violence -1% +1% Asked to leave by parents -10% -1% Asked to leave by other +1% -11% relatives / friends
58 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Termination of assured -3% -3% shorthold Required to leave NASS +4% +3% accommodation
The following table shows the change in main reasons for homelessness acceptances in Stockport changing over the 2007 – 2010 period. It should be noted that due to the relatively low numbers dealt with, the percentage can appear higher than is statistically significant and therefore should be viewed solely as a proportion:
Fig. 35 Cause of homelessness 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/2010 Domestic Violence (DV) 47 (21%) 32 (21%) 20 (16%) 24 (20%) Asked to leave by parents 61 (27%) 39 (26%) 38 (30%) 21 (17%) Asked to leave by other 17 (7%) 4 (3%) 7 (5%) 10 (8%) relatives / friends Termination of assured 29 (13%) 13 (9%) 12 (9%) 12 (10%) shorthold Required to leave NASS 4 (2%) 18 (12%) 9 (7%) 7 (6%) accommodation
Fig. 36
2009/10 24 21 10 12 7
2008/9 20 38 7 12 9
2007/8 32 39 4 13 18
2006/7 47 61 17 29 4
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
DV Parents Relatives Tenancy NASS
As can be seen from the above tables and charts, Stockport has experienced a dramatic reduction in homeless acceptances from people asked to leave by friends; 9% more than the national figure. This can be attributed to preventative tools such as mediation and the Deposit Scheme, as well as effective advice on housing options such as Homechoice and the RSLs. Additionally there has been a great deal of work done around publicising services in Stockport where people can prevent themselves becoming homeless, and managing expectations of what will happen if they do. There
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 59 has also been a reduction in the proportion of domestic violence acceptances, but overall this has taken over from being asked to leave by parents as the main cause of homelessness in Stockport. The only rise in proportion of acceptances over the review period has been applicants required to leave NASS accommodation as a result of a positive asylum decision from the Home Office. There has been a rise in this nationally, but Stockport’s proportion has exceeded this. There will be a further discussion around refugees later in the review.
Main reasons for priority need
Priority need refers to where the Council has a duty to rehouse an applicant / household, due to them falling into an automatic priority category (for example having dependent children, being pregnant or being a care leaver aged under 21), or because they are found to be more vulnerable than an ‘ordinary’ homeless person. This would indicate that where the applicant would have remained as homeless, they would have been less able to fend for themselves than an ordinary homeless person, and that as a result of this they would have suffered injury or detriment. Whether or not someone is deemed to be vulnerable outside of the automatic priority categories is a matter of assessment by the local authority, and the decision is made given regards to legislation, case law, and evidence provided by the applicant and other services relating to them.
The table below shows the reasons for priority need both Stockport and nationally in 2009/10:
Fig. 37 Reasons for priority need Local National Variance Dependent children 75 (61%) 22,950 (57%) +4% Pregnant 10 (8%) 4,580 (11%) -3% Vulnerable 37 (30%) 12,290 (31%) -1% Emergency 1 (0.8%) 200 (1%) -0.2%
This is compared to 2006/07:
Fig. 38 Reasons for priority need Local National Variance Dependent children 139 (61%) 40,600 (55%) +6% Pregnant 13 (6%) 8,480 (12%) -6% Vulnerable 76 (33%) 20,720 (32%) +1% Emergency 1 (0.4%) 4,100 (1%) -0.6%
As can be seen from the above data, the majority of cases where a full homelessness duty has been accepted are vulnerable due to having dependent children. This proportion has remained the same at around 61% of all cases, and is slightly higher than the national average. One explanation for this may be the lack of family accommodation available in Stockport, especially larger houses.
60 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Stockport has experienced a lower proportion of homeless acceptances of those vulnerable due to pregnancy than the national average; there is no clear explanation for this other than effective homelessness prevention tools such as mediation. There has been a slight rise in the proportion of pregnant households being accepted since 2006/07 however; it is speculated that this could be due to Housing Benefit reforms not allowing pregnant applicants a second room rate of Local Housing Allowance until the baby is born, or Homechoice not awarding overcrowding points until the same time.
The most notable change has been the reduction in homelessness acceptances amongst other vulnerable groups. This is positive progress from the previous homelessness review, where there were concerns that vulnerable people were not benefiting from the options approach as much as families. The change can be attributed in part to increased promotion of the service and joint working with agencies such as Children’s Services, Connexions and the Community Mental Health Team.
National Indicator 156
As discussed in section 2 of this document, the Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPIs) which were reported in the last homelessness review have now been replaced by the National Indicator Set. Stockport Homes’ Housing Options Team is responsible for the return of one indicator; NI156: number of households in temporary accommodation at the end of each quarter. NI156 was introduced with a target of halving the number of priority need households in temporary accommodation by 2010, from 31 December 2004.
NI156 is an important indicator as it recognises the value of homelessness prevention, and in keeping vulnerable families and individuals from going through the upheaval of moving into temporary accommodation. Preventing households from becoming homeless is also a much more cost effective option, as will be discussed in a section towards the end of this review. NI156 also aims to ensure that where homelessness cannot be prevented, time spent within temporary accommodation is as short as possible.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 61 In Stockport 55 households were in temporary accommodation on the starting date, and so the CLG set a target of reducing this to 27 households by 2010. Stockport however then set itself the more challenging local target of 23 (58% reduction). The following chart plots the progress in achieving this indicator:
Fig. 39 70
60
50
40
30 2010 Target (27)
20 DEC 04 DEC 05 DEC 06 DEC 07 DEC 08 DEC 09 MAR 05 MAR 06 MAR 07 MAR 08 MAR 09 MAR 10
SEPT 04 SEPT 05 SEPT 06 SEPT 07 SEPT 08 SEPT 09
JUNE 07 JUNE JUNE 08 JUNE JUNE 06 JUNE JUNE 09 JUNE
JUNE 04 JUNE 05 JUNE
As can be seen from the chart, Stockport achieved the national indicator target in September 2008; one and a half years prior to the deadline. Additionally it had achieved its local target of 23 by 2010. Based on Stockport’s size as the third largest borough in Greater Manchester, in real terms this is a reduction of 62% per thousand of its population. The NI156 figure has reduced by 41% overall nationally.
Certain peaks within the chart are evident, and are due partly to seasonal trends; these occur largely in the summer months which may be due to an increased number of mediation cases amongst young people leaving school, or family tensions due to children being at home more. Other trends, such as the one identified by the chart mid-2008, are for more specific reasons; in this instance there was an increased number of families leaving NASS accommodation due to a backlog of ‘legacy’ (long- term) asylum cases receiving positive decisions from the Home Office.
Several things have contributed to the achievement of the NI156; increased preventative work has been crucial, such as the Deposit Scheme, Mediation, Housing Support Point and signposting to other services. Additionally due to amendments made to the Allocations Policy, households with a homelessness duty accepted towards them attracted a higher level of rehousing points than previously. This has led to quicker move on from temporary accommodation. Stockport Homes and some
62 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 of the RSLs have also undertaken small building projects, and a stock transfer to Mossbank housing association from Manchester City Council’s overspill estates has increased the general availability of stock in the Borough.
There are forthcoming risks which are highly likely to affect the NI156 over the lifetime of this strategy. Firstly there is a concern that the economic climate will have a detrimental impact on employment and income, possibly leading to increased presentations on the grounds of affordability and repossession. Additionally higher levels of non-dependents may be asked to leave family homes due to increased benefit reductions. Secondly funding may be cut from other services which could have an impact on the prevention tools available; for example Supporting People may reduce the funds committed to the temporary accommodation and floating support services, and funding for the Deposit Scheme may not continue to be secured. Finally the allocations review could have an effect on move on options from temporary accommodation; although homeless applicants are in a ‘reasonable preference’ group, changes to the points system may slow down the rehousing process.
In October 2010 the Government announced that there would be a complete review of all national indicators set by the CLG, with a view to removing them and replacing them with a less bureaucratic monitoring system. At the time of this Review further guidance is awaited; however as with the discontinued Best Value Performance Indicators NI156 could be retained as a local target given its focus on improving outcomes for homeless households, and negating the need for the upheaval and cost of temporary accommodation.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 63 6. Discussion and findings: Part C, Specific themes
The analysis and scoping undertaken by the review so far has frequently made reference to more in depth analysis of both the main reasons for homelessness, associated issues and local and national priorities. This is due to the fact that homelessness does not exist in isolation, and prevention will involve utilising a range of tools and support.
The following themes are drawn from statistical analysis of trends, strategic links and national and regional priorities. They also give reference to issues raised through consultation with stakeholders, service-users and staff.
Main reasons for homelessness in priority need groups
Violent breakdown of relationship involving partner
After the Homelessness Review 2007, acceptances as a result of domestic violence declined, to 32 and 20 cases in 2007/08 and 2008/09 respectively. However over the past financial year this decline has turned into a marginal increase, as 24 acceptances were due to domestic violence. In terms of the proportion of acceptances overall, the figures have gone from 21% in 2007/08, to 16% in 2008/09, and in 2009/10 finished at 20%.
Fig. 40 30
25
20
15
10
5 DEC 04 DEC 05 DEC 06 DEC 07 DEC 08 DEC 09 MAR 05 MAR 06 MAR 07 MAR 08 MAR 09 MAR 10
SEPT 04 SEPT 05 SEPT 06 SEPT 07 SEPT 08 SEPT 09
JUNE 07 JUNE JUNE 08 JUNE JUNE 06 JUNE JUNE 09 JUNE
JUNE 04 JUNE 05 JUNE
Domestic violence was raised in the previous homelessness strategy, and preventative tools such as MARAC and the Sanctuary Scheme were implemented. This is in addition to awareness raising campaigns on both a local and national level, and the
64 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 provision of support groups and programmes via the public and voluntary sector – for example, Stockport Women’s Aid provide outreach to women at risk of violence, and the Women’s Centre provide a ‘freedom programme’ which victims can attend in a group setting. However from the volume of homelessness applications and feedback provided by customers who had experienced domestic violence, there appear to be on-going concerns about how the issue is tackled24. These included:
• A lack of information sharing between agencies, such as the Police and the Housing Options Team • A disjointed process for existing tenants suffering domestic abuse, where awareness of the Stockport Homes Domestic Violence Policy and Procedure was low • Concerns about the availability and supply of suitable interim accommodation whilst homelessness is investigated
Three sanctuary schemes have been installed in Stockport Homes tenancies to date; these schemes involve the creation of a safe room, i.e. ‘sanctuary’ within a victim’s property in which they can go to when the perpetrator is present. These safe rooms will usually include reinforced doors and windows, and a means of contacting the Police to come and remove the perpetrator. There have also been a large number of other measures taken, such as target hardening, alarm fitting and floating support, which undoubtedly will have helped individuals to remain in their homes without being subject to repeated instances of violence, where this is their decision to do so.
Stockport Homes has a domestic violence policy and procedure for its own tenants, whereby the Anti-Social Behaviour Team can take action such as obtaining an injunction against or removing the perpetrator from the premises if they are a joint tenant. In cases where the victim is not a tenant these remedies have to be sought through other routes, for example the victim’s landlord or a solicitor. Something to consider in the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy is ensuring that all victims of domestic violence have clear pathways to accessing the same support and advice, and that this is publicised to them. Options such as the Sanctuary Scheme and floating support are already open to all tenures, but not necessarily well known.
The recent Government Strategy, ‘Together we can end violence against women and girls’ (HM Government, 2009), has placed an emphasis on prevention, protection and provision. The strategy calls for closer working between the Home Office, Police, Children’s Trust Boards and other agencies to tackle domestic violence in their areas. 24. Consultation This issue will be of on-going concern in Stockport given the prominence of MARAC, exercise with residents at and the introduction of a new Domestic Violence Court. Strathclyde House, 16th For consideration: June 2010 • Establish links with Domestic Violence Court / Coordinator. • Increase the promotion of Sanctuary Schemes and MARAC. • Investigate changes to the Allocations Policy to support victims of domestic violence.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 65 Parents no longer willing to accommodate
Aside from domestic violence, this remains the most common reason cited for homelessness in Stockport; it is also the most common for applicants not in priority need, as will be explored later in this review. Acceptances have declined over time, as illustrated by the graph below; they have also decreased proportionally from 26% of acceptances in 2007/08, to 17% in 2009/10. As the graphs show however, from a low in the second quarter of 2009 cases are beginning to increase again.
Fig. 41 70
60
50
40
30
20
5 DEC 05 DEC 06 DEC 07 DEC 08 DEC 09 DEC 04 MAR 06 MAR 07 MAR 08 MAR 09 MAR 10 MAR 05
SEPT 05 SEPT 06 SEPT 07 SEPT 08 SEPT 09 SEPT 04
JUNE 07 JUNE JUNE 08 JUNE JUNE 06 JUNE JUNE 09 JUNE
JUNE 04 JUNE 05 JUNE
Instances where people have been asked to leave by parents often involve multiple, complex issues, especially where it involves a young person. The Housing Options Team has joint working protocols with agencies such as Children’s Services, the Youth Offending Team, Connexions and MOSAIC amongst others to address such complex needs, which are crucial in providing support to this vulnerable group. However, there are on-going concerns from such agencies about the sustainability of tenancies and placements offered to young people who have been made homeless by their parents, due to their often limited independent living skills. Any young person who goes through the Housing Options Team will be offered a referral to some kind of floating support, but this does not always achieved the desired outcome. For example, some young people may not maintain contact and detach from services, or may find it difficult to relay their problems due to poor communication skills. Concerns directly expressed by agencies themselves include rehousing in multi-storey blocks where young people
66 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 are exposed to a wider group of people who may have a negative impact on their behaviour.
The number of adult children asked to leave by parents is likely to rise given the government’s announcement of cuts to housing and welfare benefits. For example, non-dependent deductions to those in receipt of housing benefit are set to increase. For younger children 16-17 years old where payments are received, child benefit and tax credits could decrease. All other benefits, for example Job Seekers Allowance and Employment Support Allowance, will rise at a slower rate given their link to the consumer rather than retail price index, which has a historically lower value. On top of this the cost of living is set to rise with VAT increasing from 17.5% to 20%, which means that many families may see keeping adult children at home as simply unaffordable.
Agencies within Stockport will need to be prepared to offer detailed financial advice on how adult children and their families can make these changes affordable; for example through offering support with finding employment, or undertaking financial assessments to determine a household’s disposable income. However the likelihood is that as a knee jerk reaction to the announcements and their portrayal in the media, homelessness from low income families is set to increase.
Other relatives or friends no longer willing or able to accommodate
Although levels of homelessness due to the breakdown of lodging arrangements with friends and other family members are not as high as those asked to leave by parents, the groups do tend to have similar characteristics. Acceptances due to this have been declining steadily, but it is anticipated that they could rise also with changes in the benefit system. Hosts may find that they are no longer able to afford to keep accommodating friends and family, or they in turn cannot contribute financially to the household. There are also often on-going issues, such as substance misuse, mental health concerns and in some cases offending behaviour which have led to the person lodging between various family and friends in the first instance.
Applicants which fall within this group are often a result of natural household formation; for example partners choosing to live together or having children of their own. As a relatively low priority amongst social housing allocations is currently afforded to those lodging with immediate family, some new households can let their housing issues build for some time within the family home before moving between friends, then eventually becoming homeless.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 67 Fig. 42 30
25
20
15
10
5 DEC 04 DEC 05 DEC 06 DEC 07 DEC 08 DEC 09 MAR 05 MAR 06 MAR 07 MAR 08 MAR 09 MAR 10
SEPT 04 SEPT 05 SEPT 06 SEPT 07 SEPT 08 SEPT 09
JUNE 07 JUNE JUNE 08 JUNE JUNE 06 JUNE JUNE 09 JUNE
JUNE 04 JUNE 05 JUNE Often people asked to leave by other relatives or friends will have been ‘sofa-surfing’, i.e. moving between various friends addresses with no real fixed abode. These groups may have already been asked to leave their original family home previously, and therefore there initial cause of homelessness needs to be looked at. This can be an effect, and further cause of economic inactivity, poor health and behavioural issues. Crisis estimate the cost of ‘hidden homelessness’ such as this to be £100 million annually to health, police and criminal justice services, and £450 million in lost income to the state due to the lack of paid work25.
For consideration: • Investigate expanding the provision of foyer / supported lodgings accommodation for young people in partnership with Children’s Services’ Commissioning Strategy. • Expand home visits to those being asked to leave by hosts. • Investigate formation of multi agency youth homelessness panel.
Termination of assured shorthold tenancy
Homeless acceptances as a result of this have steeply declined since their peak 25. Crisis in 2005, but still form the third largest cause of homelessness in groups to which (2004) Hidden Homelessness: the Council owes the main statutory duty. From late 2008 homelessness due to Britain’s invisible termination of assured tenancies was at an all-time low; however throughout late 2009 city, p7 and the first quarter of 2010 it began to increase again.
68 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Fig. 43
40
35 30
25
20
15
10
5 DEC 05 DEC 06 DEC 07 DEC 08 DEC 09 DEC 04 MAR 06 MAR 07 MAR 08 MAR 09 MAR 10 MAR 05
SEPT 05 SEPT 06 SEPT 07 SEPT 08 SEPT 09 SEPT 04
JUNE 07 JUNE JUNE 08 JUNE JUNE 06 JUNE JUNE 09 JUNE
JUNE 04 JUNE 05 JUNE
Numbers of non-priority applicants becoming homeless due to termination of assured shorthold have also begun to increase slightly in the last two years.
Part of the explanation for increased termination of tenancies is the current economic climate, especially where landlords themselves are being repossessed. However through the introduction of the Mortgage Repossessions (Protection of Tenants) Act 2010, tenants will have further protection and an extended length of stay when their landlord is repossessed, in order to enable them to secure alternative accommodation. The strategy therefore should consider how best to raise awareness of the act.
It is important to remember that overall numbers have dramatically decreased as a result of intensive work undertaken by the Housing Options Team and its partners. This has included working with Housing Standards over illegal eviction and disrepair; negotiating with landlords over rent arrears and tenant behaviour; and also intensive support work and flexibility offered by the Stockport Homes Deposit Scheme. In addition, the Housing Options Team has utilised the Exceptional Payment Fund as well as Discretionary Housing Payments to help tenants clear arrears and fund deposits and other charges to ensure they are able to access and remain in this sector.
Homelessness in this sector often occurs due to the tenant struggling with affordability or support needs that may not currently be met. With the establishment of the Housing Support Point vulnerable groups have an easier route to housing related support regardless of tenure, and awareness of this should be raised. The introduction of Local Housing Allowance has gone some way to increasing the affordability of the sector, but has also arguably pushed up rents as landlords assimilate their monthly charges with
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 69 the rate. However, reductions in this benefit have since been announced, the effects of which will be explored later in this review. Affordability can be addressed through increasing a household’s prospects for work; the Stockport Homes Employment Officer for example could expand their remit to include tenants in the private sector.
Regulation of the private sector is also of on-going concern, as homelessness still occurs due to illegal eviction and harassment, and disputes over disrepair and deposits. Although there is an existing legal framework around this and enforcement action can be taken by Housing Standards, not all tenants are aware of this. The previous Homelessness Strategy set an action for the development of an Accredited Landlord Scheme; however progress on this has been limited, with only a small scheme having been piloted. In light of changes across Greater Manchester, Stockport has now decided to adopt an overarching regional scheme. Such a scheme would be beneficial to the Borough as it would allow for greater control of the private sector, ensuring it is a viable option for vulnerable tenants. In future Stockport may also consider managing some private properties itself as some other authorities do; however this would be a more long term action for the strategy.
Homelessness prevention in the private sector can also benefit from targeting particular ‘hotspots’ where there is a greater concentration of private tenants. The 2001 Census found that the majority of private tenants were concentrated in the Heatons, Reddish and Edgeley and Cheadle Heath, ranging from 7.6-13.5% of all households. Although homelessness from these areas may not be a major cause of concern, driving up private sector standards and offering comprehensive advice on repairs and legal rights will help contribute to the on-going reduction of homelessness due to the loss of assured shorthold tenancies.
For consideration: • Investigate setting up a ‘local / social lettings agency’ to coordinate private sector tenancies • Implement an Accredited Landlord Scheme • Advertise private properties via Choice Based Lettings once accredited landlord scheme is established
Required to leave accommodation provided by Home Office as asylum support
Homeless acceptances amongst refugees have shown the most fluctuation over lifetime of the previous strategy; therefore although it may not be the main cause of homelessness, it is one of the more difficult ones to address. Rises in the volume of applications from households leaving NASS accommodation is usually attributed to particular activities within the Home Office and UK Border Agency; for example, the steep incline in 2007/08 was a consequence of a wave of what were termed “legacy” asylum cases receiving decisions granting them leave to remain. More recently in 2009, the Stockport Homes Asylum Team secured a one year Gateway Protection
70 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Programme contract, supporting the rehousing and integration of arrivals from Iraq. Since these waves acceptances have reduced from 12% of all cases in 2007/08 to 6% in 2009/10, but it remains an issue to be conscious of. Fig. 44 10 9
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 DEC 04 DEC 05 DEC 06 DEC 07 DEC 08 DEC 09 MAR 05 MAR 06 MAR 07 MAR 08 MAR 09 MAR 10
SEPT 04 SEPT 05 SEPT 06 SEPT 07 SEPT 08 SEPT 09
JUNE 07 JUNE JUNE 08 JUNE JUNE 06 JUNE JUNE 09 JUNE
JUNE 04 JUNE 05 JUNE Supporting this theory behind the rise is non-priority homelessness; there were only two decisions made on those required to leave NASS accommodation in 2006/07 and none in 2008/09, but similar peaks to priority homelessness of five in 2007/08 and 7 in 2009/10.
Although the Housing Options Team has a strong and collaborative relationship with Stockport Homes’ Asylum Team, it is more difficult at present to predict what cases will make presentations from other providers. Applications have been received from households provided with Home Office support from at least three other private sector landlord providers with properties in the Stockport area, and due to the nature of the asylum process the notice given is time limited. Additionally, households in this accommodation may not receive the same collaborative service those provided with assistance by Stockport Homes’ Asylum Team do, and therefore would not necessarily approach the authority for assistance. Evidence where this may have happened can be seen in supported forecast figures which are provided by UKBA to the Asylum Team; in 2009/10, 18 families were supported in Stockport, but only nine approached the service and were given a homelessness duty. The new Homelessness Strategy therefore should work to build links with these other providers, to maximise the timescale and housing options available to households leaving NASS accommodation.
Advanced notification and increased monitoring may also be beneficial to gain more insight into the cultural requirements of households in this type of accommodation. For example, although Home Office placements can be made anywhere in the Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 71 UK, some groups may not wish to remain in the Stockport area. Integration and enhanced housing options for this group to look at viable alternatives therefore are recommended.
For consideration: Develop joint working protocols / early notification agreements with private providers of NASS accommodation.
Non priority homelessness
Whilst there has been a decrease in acceptances of households to which a full homeless duty is owed, non-priority homelessness has risen over the review period. In the last financial year 183 people were found to be homeless but not in priority need, with no rehousing duty owed; although the Council does have a power to provide accommodation, and a duty to provide advice and assistance to help them remedy their situation.
Fig. 45
200
150
100
50
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 The rise in non-priority homelessness could be attributed in part to the focus of increased preventative work on applicants who would be owed a homeless duty. Resources such as the Exceptional Payment Fund, Mortgage Rescue Scheme and Deposit Scheme are focussed solely on applicants in priority need, thus precluding non priority applicants from accessing the same range of housing options. Reforms to the Housing Benefit system have also meant that single people under 25 in particular only qualify for a ‘shared room rate’ whilst not working or on a low income, and with Stockport’s high rent prices accommodation in this price range can be difficult to obtain. This is set to become more problematic as the age rises to 35 in 2012.
However, non-priority decisions should not be taken solely to mean a rise in overall
72 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 levels of homelessness; it can be viewed as a result of greater provision of advice and assistance. It is also recognition of ‘sofa-surfing’ and ‘hidden homelessness’ within the Borough. Stockport has a lack of temporary accommodation for non-priority applicants, but efforts to reduce the number of families in temporary accommodation have freed up resources to assist this group, who would otherwise continue to be ‘sofa surfing’, rough sleeping or placed out of the Borough.
The main reasons for non-priority homelessness across Stockport during the review period were as follows:
Fig. 46
50 Parents not willing to accommodate 40 Other relatives / friends 30 Non violent breakdown 20 of relationships
10 Leaving prison
0 Rough sleeping 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
People being asked to leave by parents or other relatives and friends are the main cause of homelessness amongst non-priority groups, which is comparable with those in priority need. There has been a rise over the review period of these causes of homelessness, which may be set to continue given forthcoming benefit reforms which are very likely to affect single non priority adults living at home with families in receipt of benefits.
Unlike those in priority need however there are more specific issues amongst non- priority applicants with rough sleeping and leaving prison, and homelessness as a result of these circumstances has risen over the review period. Part of the reason for this rise is increased outreach and support for people in these circumstances; for example the Housing Options Officer for Offenders undertakes prison visits, and the Special Needs Housing Officer monitors rough sleeping sightings. However, the rise may also be due to the lack of alternative services and accommodation for these groups. They often come with distinct issues which may deter traditional housing providers from accommodating them; for example rough sleepers may come with dogs or substance misuse issues, and those from prison with prolific offences. People with these issues can benefit from direct assistance from the Council and Stockport Homes, which can worsen where they remain unaddressed. Stockport Homes has
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 73 used innovation at its Temporary Accommodation Schemes to solve such issues, for example through the provision of kennels and home detox. There is clearly an on-going demand due to the numbers of applicants becoming homeless with more complex needs and the future numbers anticipated in the wake of benefit reforms, which makes sustaining the current services a priority.
For consideration: • Increase housing options for single people, including capacity of Deposit Scheme or similar to provide assistance. • Establish ‘spare room’ scheme for 18-35s to access private housing. • Investigate the possibility of an adult version of the community supported lodgings scheme. • Continue to bring down NI156 and increase capacity of temporary accommodation to support single people.
Intentional homelessness
The Housing Act 1996 s191 states:
“A person becomes homeless intentionally if he deliberately does or fails to do anything in consequence of which he ceases to occupy accommodation which is available for his occupation and which it would have been reasonable for him to continue to occupy.”26
The onus is on the Council to prove intentional homelessness rather than the applicant, and all of the criteria listed in the statement above must be satisfied. Over the review period, there has been an overall decline in the numbers of people found intentionally homeless. This is despite a peak in 2007/08 as shown below:
Fig. 47 30
25
20
15
10
5
26. ODPM, 1996 Housing Act, 0 s191 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
74 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 The graph below shows the main reasons why people became intentionally homeless, ranging from deliberately ceasing to occupy their accommodation to omitting to pay rent that is due:
Fig. 48
10 Arrears - LA 9 8 Arrears - RSL 7 Arrears - PS 6 ASB / Offences 5 4 Abandonment 3 Ceased to occupy 2 1 Sold property Mortgage arrears 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
The graphs above both demonstrate that intentional homelessness decisions have greatly reduced on a whole over the review period; this could be taken to complement the findings earlier in this review that homelessness prevention and tenancy support 27. See page X of has greatly increased27. It would also be expected that the number would reduce this document alongside a wider reductions in numbers of homeless applicants. However some reasons have proved more persistent than others; these have been arrears on private and local authority tenancies, and ASB which featured highly in the middle years of the review period. Intentionally homeless applicants also had underlying needs that included:
Fig. 49
16 Dependants 14 12 Pregnant 10 Mental health 8 Physical health 6 Former care 4 2 16/17 year old
2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 75 There were similarities in the intentionally homeless decisions made upon those in priority need due to mental health issues. In 2006/07, both cases were intentionally homeless were intentionally homeless due to ASB. In 2007/08 six applicants were vulnerable due to mental health issues, three due to ASB and the rest due to abandonment of tenancies or arrears. Since the introduction of measures such as a joint working protocol with the Community Mental Health Team and Stockport Homes Housing Management Teams however, intentional homelessness amongst mental health groups has not occurred. This is a credit to the work undertaken by the last homelessness strategy, which meant such tenants did not reach crisis point. Similarly intentional homelessness amongst 16-17 year olds due to anti-social behaviour has been reduced to no instances in the last financial year. In 2007/08 all four who became intentionally homeless were found so because of ASB, and in 2008/09 all five.
There are still issues around households becoming intentionally homeless due to accruing rent arrears, both in the private and public sector. This form of homelessness may become even more prominent due to welfare benefit reforms planned for 2011, and the on-going effects of the recession. There are measures in place internally within Stockport Homes whereby when a tenant is issued with eviction proceedings due to rent arrears, Housing Options and Resettlement will contact that tenant to try and prevent homelessness. However this has not been replicated with every Housing Association, and could be difficult to replicate amongst private sector tenants due to the large number of landlords across Stockport. However efforts to replicate such a procedure should be considered in the new homelessness strategy.
For consideration: • Replicate eviction protocol with all RSLs operating in Stockport. • Increase publicity and awareness of the Housing Options Team via landlord’s forums and Housing Benefit communication. • Develop protocol with ASBAT / Stockport Homes’ ASB Team to establish early warning system on problem households. • Partner Stockport Advice / Revenues and Benefits in publicising implications of planned benefit cuts and identifying at risk tenancies.
BME homelessness
28. Race Equality At a national level concerns have been expressed academically about the difficulty Foundation, Linking black and some BME groups face in accessing mainstream homelessness services. This minority ethnic could be due to a lack of awareness, or a preference to rely on the voluntary and organisations faith sectors28. Stockport has a relatively small BME population but evidence around with mainstream homeless acceptances shows that proportionately many are accessing the service. homeless service The following chart shows the extent of BME homeless acceptances (excluding White providers, May 2010 British groups) throughout the review period:
76 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Fig. 50
9 White Irish 8 White other 7 Black (Afr/Car/Other) 6 5 Asian (Ind/Pak/Ban/Other) 4 Mix White+Black Af/Car) 3 Mix White+Asian 2 Mix White+Other 1 Chinese 0 Other 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
The following table shows overall BME homelessness as a proportion of acceptances in each year:
Fig. 51 2006/07 9% 2007/08 12% 2008/09 11% 2009/10 17%
These figures show that BME homelessness has been over three times the proportion of BME residents reported to live in Stockport (4.3%, 2001 Census, but 6.5% at recent estimate by AGMA).
Looking at these statistics in more detail, in 2006/07 the highest incidents of BME homelessness where amongst Asian applicants; seven across all Asian groups amounting to 4% of acceptances. Homelessness amongst the Asian groups has remained one of the highest in BME homelessness in Stockport; in the last financial year 6 applicants made up of Indian (one), Pakistani (two), Bangladeshi (two) and Other Asian (one) were awarded a full homelessness duty. As Pakistani and Indian groups make up the largest population of BME groups in Stockport (1% and 0.6% respectively), this is only slightly disproportionate and not seen as statistically significant.
Homelessness amongst ‘white other’ groups has remained fairly low and reasonably static, at an average of three acceptances each year. Chinese and mixed White and Asians also have low instances of homeless acceptances.
The only clear trend showing an increase in homelessness is amongst Black African, Caribbean and Other groups. Homelessness amongst these groups has trebled over
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 77 the review period, and accounted for 7% of all acceptances in the 2009/10 financial year. Black or Black British Caribbean, African and other groups made up less than 1% of the Stockport population in 2001, so there are clearly disproportionate levels of homelessness amongst this section of the population. Nationally, research has indicated that there is a correlation between homelessness and ethnic origin, which requires further attention.
The increase in BME homelessness is due in part to the number of acceptances from those leaving NASS accommodation; trends and recommendations for which have already been explored. It could also be attributed to increased awareness raising, which was highlighted as an area for development in the last homelessness review. Since 2007 there have been greater efforts to identify with BME groups; for example through Homechoice undertaking focus groups with Chinese and Farsi applicants, and increased availability of ESOL classes via Stockport’s libraries and information centres, Stockport College, and the Temporary Accommodation Schemes.
The following chart shows the percentage of BME homelessness (excluding white British groups) amongst non-priority households:
Fig. 52 6 Black (Afr/Car/Other)
5 White Irish White Other 4 Asian (Ind/Pak/Ban/Other) 3 Mix white+black Afr
2 Mix white+black Car
1 Mix white+Asian
0 Mix white+other 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Other The following table shows BME homelessness as a proportion of non-priority decisions in each year:
Fig. 53 2006/07 7.9% 2007/08 7.6% 2008/09 9.7% 2009/10 10.4%
Non priority homelessness within BME groups has increased over the review period, but not as substantially as applicants owed a full homeless duty. Again this could
78 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 be due to those leaving NASS accommodation. The largest increase is amongst Asian groups, which could include some refugees from the Middle East, or could be explained by high levels of overcrowding and unemployment amongst these groups.
In comparison with the proportion of BME homeless decisions, the table below shows the percentage of housing options interviews which have been undertaken with BME groups in the last three years:
Fig. 54 Ethnicity 07-08 08-09 09-10 White British 868 (90.8%) 606 (95%) 523 (89%) BME 83 (9.2%) 31 (5%) 62 (11%)
These figures show higher levels of homeless acceptances in proportion to numbers of BME applicants interviewed; for example whilst 11% of people interviewed in 2009/10 were from a BME group, they made up 17% of homeless acceptances. Again, this could be due in part to applicants leaving NASS accommodation without accommodation or employment to go to, where homelessness prevention can be more difficult. Overall however it would appear that the service is well known to BME groups due to the increasing proportion of interviews undertaken.
Geographically speaking, BME groups are largely concentrated in certain areas of Stockport: Heatons South (11.3%), Cheadle and Gatley (9.9%), Heald Green (9.4%), Heatons North (6.8%) and Bramhall North (5%). Efforts to reduce BME homelessness may therefore need to be targeted further afield from traditional locations such as the town centre, Brinnington and Bridgehall. There are high levels of home ownership amongst Indian groups; there is a potential threat of homelessness therefore from mortgage issues given the current economic climate. The same group also experiences the highest levels of overcrowding in Stockport, and Pakistani and Bangladeshi groups in particular have some of the highest levels of unemployment. Domestic and ‘honour’ based violence is also a factor to consider, as some women from BME groups may have limited access to support services. A final issue to consider is health; Caribbean groups report the highest level of long term limiting illness (almost 20%) in the Borough after White British residents, whilst also having a high number of residents generally not in good health, alongside Pakistani and African groups. These factors may contribute to a future threat of homelessness, so early intervention methods need to be identified that are appropriate and accessible to these groups.
For consideration: • Promote awareness of homelessness services via voluntary sector, RSLs and faith based groups. • Undertake research into the ward origin for BME applicants to see if alternative targeting is needed.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 79 Disability
Disability affects a significant proportion of the adult working age population, which can lead to complications in finding and sustaining employment, housing and related services. The aforementioned JSNA found that:
• 48,400 people in private homes have a long term limiting illness. • There are 11,975 claimants of working age for incapacity benefit or severe disablement allowance. • More than 10% of the 50-59 age group are receiving such benefits. • There are 12,630 claimants of disability living allowance. • 4,100 people are provided with social services for a disability, frailty or temporary illness. • There are 700 people on GP registers with recognised learning disabilities. • 550 adults are registered as blind, and 870 as partially sighted. • 3,200 people are estimated to be severely or profoundly deaf.
These statistics have implications, as if rendered homeless all of these ‘vulnerabilities’ must be considered for potential priority need under homelessness legislation.
Stockport Homes has undertaken monitoring on disability since 2007/08, which includes monitoring of self-declaring applicants who are given a homeless decision, and customers given a housing options interview. The table below shows in more detail the number of applicants declaring themselves to have a disability in the last financial year:
Fig. 55 Overall Decisions Full duty accepted cases Disability Number % Number Full duty accepted cases % Yes 101 30 33 27 No 240 70 89 73 Sum 341 100% 122 100%
The table below compares this with previous years:
Fig. 56 Disability 07-08 08-09 09-10 Yes 34 (22%) 27 (21%) 33 (27%) No 118 (78%) 101 (79%) 89 (73%) Total 152 128 122
This comparison shows that proportionately there has been a slight increase in the last year of full duty homeless applicants identifying themselves as having a disability. As this is based on self-certification it is difficult to ascertain the reason for this rise; however it may be due to increased publicity of the service via the internet,
80 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 newspapers and Stockport Advice Centres, outreach surgeries to locations such as Stepping Hill Hospital, and making the Housing Information Centre and other offices more accessible to people with physical disabilities or sensory impairments.
Housing Options forms and the Northgate Housing System were amended in the past two years to allow the service to more effectively monitor applicants with a disability. Looking first at applicants in priority need, the following disabilities were cited:
Fig. 57
Mental health
Physical disabilities 25 Wheelchair user 20 Mobility issues 15 Learning difficulties 10 Diabetes 5 Sensory impairment 0 2008/09 2009/10 Other
‘Other disabilities’ are the most commonly cited by applicants in priority need; due to the fact that as applicants self-declare their disability, there can be a wide range of interpretations and illnesses cited. Other common features are mental health and physical mobility issues, which cover a broad spectrum. Health issues are covered in more depth later in this review. Amongst non-priority applicants, the following disabilities were cited: Fig. 58
Mental health 40 Physical disabilities 30 Wheelchair user Mobility issues 20 Learning difficulties
10 Diabetes
Sensory impairment 0 Other 2008/09 2009/10
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 81 Self-declared disabilities amongst non-priority applicants showed similar trends in that ‘other disabilities’ and mental health issues were the most commonly cited. There were lower instances of disabilities such as diabetes, although this may be due to serious cases of this indicating priority need.
Records of housing options interviews show a similar number of applicants declaring themselves to have a disability to those accepted as homeless:
Fig. 59 Disability 07-08 08-09 09-10 Yes 193 (20%) 153 (23%) 158 (27%) No 763 (80%) 504 (77%) 427 (73%) Total 956 657 585
There are clearly a significant proportion of applicants approaching the Housing Options Team for assistance who have issues with health and disabilities. Although not all of these issues will have contributed towards the applicant being found to be in priority need, it is likely that they will have had some effect upon them being homeless. The service and forthcoming Homelessness Strategy therefore needs to plan how best to respond to the issues these customers face, and address health inequalities throughout the Borough.
For consideration: • Promote / raise awareness of the service through local GP surgeries and other health outlets. • Work in partnership with other agencies to implement more health and wellbeing activities in temporary accommodation.
Gender
Gender amongst homeless households is monitored within the CLG’s P1E statistical returns made by all local authorities, and within the last financial year has become increasingly monitored by Stockport Homes in line with its Equality and Diversity Strategy. The table below details decisions and full duty homeless acceptances over the last year, separated by gender:
Fig. 60 Overall Decisions Full duty accepted % acceptance as % cases overall decisions Gender Number % Number % % Male 181 53 34 28 19 Female 160 47 88 72 55 Total 341 100 122 100 -
82 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 The table demonstrates that despite slightly more male applicants having interviews resulting in a homeless decision, homeless acceptances were much more common amongst female applicants. This is a trend reflected nationally, and is mainly due to the fact that most homeless households with dependent children which confirm priority need status have a female as their head applicant; therefore a higher proportion of female acceptances are to be expected. This is supported by the data in the table below:
Fig. 61 Gender 08-09 09-10 Male 35 (27%) 34 (28%) Female 93 (73%) 88 (72%) Total 128 122
Unlike overall homeless decisions, housing options interviews have more predominantly been undertaken with women. The table below shows that there have been 8% more interviews with women than men:
Fig. 62 Gender 08-09 09-10 Male 290 (44%) 255 (44%) Female 367 (56%) 330 (56%) Total 657 585
Again, the higher proportion of female interviews can be explained by the higher instances of female heads of households with dependent children. There are also proportionally more women than men in the Stockport borough; according to the 2001 Census the proportions were 51.8% and 48.2% respectively. Taking this into account, the numbers being interviewed are not wholly disproportionate or a cause for investigation. There have been no instances of applicants declaring themselves as transgender in the review period.
Sexuality
Sexual orientation amongst homeless applicants and customers receiving housing options interviews has been monitored since July 2009. This is in line with the organisation’s Equality and Diversity Strategy, which aims to ensure that six strands of diversity are monitored to ensure fair access to services. Stockport Homes and the Council have also undertaken awareness raising at Manchester Pride festival and through joining Stonewall, to ensure that the service is accessible to all groups.
From the period July 2009 to March 2010 the following information on homelessness decisions was gathered:
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 83 Fig. 63 Overall Decisions Full duty accepted % acceptance as % cases overall decisions Sexuality Number % Number % % Heterosexual 243 95 91 98 37 Gay Male 1 0.5 0 0 0 Unwilling to 13 4.5 2 2 15 answer Total 257 100 93 100
Due to the proportion of people unwilling to answer this question, these statistics cannot be taken as an exact picture of the sexuality of homeless applicants. It does show that the majority of applicants cite themselves to be heterosexual, although due to the lack of census data on sexuality this cannot be compared to a borough total. Similarly 91% of applicants receiving a housing options interview stated to be heterosexual, with 8% unwilling to answer.
For consideration: Undertake further research into unwillingness to answer monitoring questions on sexuality / accessibility of the service in comparison with national data.
Religion
As with sexual orientation, the religion of homeless applicants and housing options customers has been monitored since July 2009; therefore no comprehensive data is available for the review period prior to this.
From the period July 2009 to March 2010 the following information on homelessness decisions was gathered:
Fig. 64 Overall Decisions Full duty accepted % acceptance as % cases overall decisions Religion Number % Number % % None 89 35 30 32 34 Not willing to 108 41 41 45 38 answer Christian 48 19 16 17 33 Muslim 6 2 5 5 83 Buddhist 2 1 1 1 50 Other 4 2 0 0 0 Total 257 100 93 100
84 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Far greater proportions (83%) of Muslim applicants were accepted as full duty homeless after presenting than any other religion, despite only making up 2% of all decisions. This is partly because the majority of these cases were those which had come from NASS accommodation, as explained previously.
Additionally, the majority of applicants actually cited no religion or were unwilling to answer. Contrasts are visible when looking at the proportion of these religious groups amongst overall housing options interviews:
Fig. 65 Religion Number % None 143 32 Not willing to answer 162 37 Christian 126 28 Muslim 9 2 Other 4 1 Sum 442
Clearly the Housing Options Team and Temporary Accommodation Schemes are working with a significant proportion of applicants from particular religious groups; it would therefore be beneficial to investigate further what measures could be put in place to provide wider assistance with housing issues.
For consideration: Promote / raise awareness of the service through local religious groups / places of worship.
Age
Homelessness legislation allows local authorities to take applications from anyone aged 16 and over; however recent case law and statutory guidance may lead to a decrease in homeless acceptances from 16-17 year olds. The age of applicants accepted as homeless is monitored within the P1E statistics, and the table below shows age distribution throughout the review period:
Fig. 66 Age group 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 acceptances 16-24 97 (42%) 62 (41%) 53 (42%) 54 (44%) 25-39 112 (49%) 61 (40%) 49 (39%) 48 (39) 40-54 18 (9%) 25(16%) 21 (17%) 16 (16%) 55-64 0 3 (2%) 2 (1%) 3 (3) 65+ 0 1 (1%) 3 (2%) 1 (1%) Total 229 152 128 123
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 85 The majority of applicants accepted as homeless have been under 40 throughout the review period; this could be explained by this being a typical age range for people who have dependent children. In recent years more applicants have been under 25; again this could be due to dependent children, but also other factors such as the cap on Local Housing Allowance and other benefits for under 25s, making some housing options less affordable. There have been relatively few acceptances from people deemed as ‘elderly’; this could be attributed to age restrictions on properties that give this age group a good chance of obtaining housing through Homechoice, and not having to present as homeless to secure accommodation.
For homelessness acceptances amongst those who were over 65, four out of the five people accepted in the review period were vulnerable as a result of their age. This is in line with homelessness legislation and case law.
Stockport Homes has monitored the age of applicants receiving Housing Options advice since 2007/08.
Fig. 67 Age group 07- 08 08-09 09-10 acceptances 16-24 301 (32%) 208 (32%) 186 (32%) 25-39 364 (38%) 246 (37%) 202 (35%) 40-54 233 (24%) 164 (25%) 152 (26%) 55-64 50 (5%) 31 (5%) 36 (6%) 65+ 8 (1%) 8(1%) 9 (1%) Total 956 657 585
The age of applicants receiving housing advice has been more even spread than those accepted as homeless; this goes some way towards verifying the theory that it can be easier to prevent homelessness amongst groups who are not under 25s or families, for example through older applicants being able to access a wider range of properties on Homechoice.
The table below shows the proportion of ages throughout Stockport at the time of the 2001 census; unfortunately this was not recorded in the same way as Stockport Homes or P1E data, but it gives a useful comparison:
Fig. 68 Age group Proportion Under 16 20.3% 16-19 4.6% 20-29 10.5% 30-59 42.8% 60-74 14.0%
86 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Looking at this data there does appear to be a disproportionate level of acceptances from under 25s in relation to the population; for example in 2009/10 44% of acceptances were from under 25s but in the Census 16-29 year olds only made up 15.1% of the population. This age range is likely to have changed as the proportion of under 16s in the Census have aged, but it still identifies a trend of homelessness amongst this age group which needs to be addressed.
It is likely that due to their young age, the under-25s group are less likely to have planned their rehousing routes or addressed their housing need, and therefore are more likely to reach a crisis situation than those who have taken a more pro-active approach. Youth homelessness and associated issues are explored in more detail in the next section of this review.
There appears to be no bias in who receives housing options however, demonstrating that the service is accessible to a wide range of the population.
Youth homelessness
As demonstrated above, a large proportion of homeless acceptances were from applicants aged 16-24. Youth homelessness presents particular issues when considered against other forms of homelessness; for example young people may never have held a tenancy previously; may have little experience of money management or applying for benefits; could have dependent children of their own or limited support networks due to relationship breakdowns with family and friends. Additionally young single or pregnant people face additional problems whilst out of work due to receiving lower rates of welfare benefits, including Job Seekers Allowance and Local Housing Allowance. These can make it more difficult financially to access some forms of housing tenure. The table below shows the extent of youth homelessness over the review period, including priority, non-priority and intentionally homeless (also priority) cases:
Fig. 69
Duty accepted 120 Non priority 100 Intentional 80 60 40 20 0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 87 Priority homelessness amongst 16-24 year olds has declined over the review period alongside overall homeless acceptances; however there was a slight increase in the last financial year. Non-priority homelessness meanwhile has increased, which may be due to the aforementioned combined difficulties of accessing financial support and housing.
The increase in youth homelessness in the last financial year is a forecast for the homelessness strategy. Given the planned cuts to welfare benefits, many young people face the combined problem of there being less affordable housing, whilst their families will incur more non dependant deductions to their own income. This could lead to increased instances of young people being asked to leave home, and a rising demand for affordable housing.
Of those in priority need, they were divided by gender as follows:
Fig. 70 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Male 24% 21% 21% 35% Female 76% 79% 79% 65% Transgender 0 0 0 0
Of those not in priority need, they were divided by gender as follows:
Fig. 71 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Male 57% 69% 68% 61% Female 43% 31% 32% 39% Transgender 0 0 0 0
Gender amongst 16-24 year olds priority need applicants shows a similar divide to overall levels of homelessness; this is largely due to female applicants being accepted due to being pregnant or having dependent children. Where male applicants have been accepted as homeless, trends such as 16-17 year olds or having formerly been in care can be identified.
The main reason young people were found to be in priority need was due to having dependent children; however 16/17 year olds have also featured highly until the last financial year, when there were only six. The chart below details the main reasons for priority need decisions in the review period:
88 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Fig. 72
50 Dependand child
40 Pregnant
30 16/17
20 Care leaver
Vulnerable - health 10
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
The slight increase in the number of young people formerly in care in the last financial year could present a source of concern. Stockport Homes has a joint working protocol with Children’s Service whereby a number of tenancies are allocated each year to care leavers; this is explored further on in this review, where potential issues will be identified.
The main cause of homelessness amongst young people in priority need was being asked to leave by parents, followed by relatives and friends. However there have also been several instances involving domestic violence, which contributes to this being a main cause of homelessness overall. The following chart details the five main reasons for homelessness amongst priority need 16-25 year olds in the review period:
Fig. 73
50
40 Parents
Relatives/friends 30 Domestic violence 20 Termination assured 10 shorthold
0 Other violence / harassment 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 89 As can be seen, loss of existing housing via instances such as termination of assured shorthold or arrears are low, if not hardly existent. The main issues which need to be addressed in youth homelessness therefore are social and economic, relating to preventing the breakdown of relationships and cushioning the blow of forthcoming benefit cuts.
Amongst those not in priority need, being asked to leave by parents was also the main cause of homelessness:
Fig. 74 Year Asked to leave by parents 2006/07 28 (48%) 2007/08 28 (77%) 2008/09 22 (44%) 2009/10 29 (41%)
Being asked to leave by other relatives or friends was the second most common reason for homelessness amongst non-priority young people; this was a similar figure for non-priority applicants overall. Relationship breakdown and loss of other hostel accommodation also features relatively highly like other non-priority applicants, but unlike those in priority need. Loss of other hostel accommodation includes the Supporting People providers in Stockport; the loss of this form of accommodation demonstrates the challenges posed and high needs some of these young people have – although they may not be vulnerable under homelessness legislation, there is clearly a need for more intensive support both prior to and during independent living. There are some differences between male and female non-priority applicants, in that homelessness due to prison release (two in 2009/10; one in 2008/09; four in 2006/07) and rough sleeping (four in 2009/10; four in 2008/09; one in 2006/07) has been solely amongst male applicants.
Stockport Homes and the Council work jointly with a number of agencies in supporting young people, and these relationships have been strengthened over the previous Homelessness Strategy. For example, Central Youth next to the Housing Information Centre allows for young people to be signposted to support, counselling and health services, and Connexions also has a relationship with housing in providing employment and training support.
For consideration: • Establish links with the review of age restrictions on social housing. • Investigate setting up a ‘spare room scheme’ to increase the supply of lodgings / licences for single under 25s. • Establish links with the Working Communities Strategy Programme to increase the number of work and training places for young people threatened with homelessness.
90 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 16-17 year olds
Stockport Homes has had an agreed joint working protocol with Children’s Services around the assessment and accommodation of 16-17 year olds experiencing housing issues since 2007/08. When this was introduced, the procedure was for all young people in this age range to initially be interviewed by the Mediation Officer, who would attempt to resolve any issues and find a way for the young person to return home with an agreed long term housing plan. In instances where this failed and the young person was found to be homeless, they would be provided with temporary accommodation under the Council’s section 188 homelessness duty. They would then be jointly assessed by a Housing Options Officer and a Social Worker. A decision would then be made on whether the young person was particularly vulnerable and met the criteria for section 20 status, thus becoming looked after by Children’s Services. In most cases Social Care did not accept a section 20 duty, and the responsibility fell to housing to provide permanent rehousing.
Acceptances amongst 16-17 year olds have declined over the review period, as the graph below demonstrates:
Fig. 75 30
25 Full duty accepted
20 Intentional
15
10
5
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 As can be expected, nearly all young people in this age range were made homeless due to being asked to leave by parents or other relatives; limited exceptions included two instances of domestic violence in 2006/07, and one eviction from other supported accommodation in 2009/10. Even where these young people have been made homeless due to other circumstances, there will have been some underlying issues which meant they could not return home to their parents.
In addition to being 16-17 years old, several of these young people were pregnant or had children of their own: three in 2006/07; eight in 2007/08; and three in 2008/09. This creates additional complications due to these young people not being old enough to legally hold their own tenancy, but there being a shortage of accommodation in
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 91 Stockport suitable for young mothers and babies. This however has begun to be addressed in part by beginning to accommodate young pregnant women / teenage parents aged 16+ at Strathclyde House.
Where young people were found to be intentionally homeless this was mostly due to persistent anti-social or criminal behaviour; issues cited included theft from parents or other relatives, violence or repeat offending.
Looking in more depth at some of the issues faced by these young people, in 2008/09 it was found that amongst 16-17 year olds who became homeless:
• Four young people had a history of offending behaviour. • Ten (59%) young people had substance misuse issues. • Eight (47%) had been the perpetrator or victim of some kind of violence.
Clearly these young people, and those made intentionally homeless, demonstrate high support needs which cannot be met through housing alone.
Since the introduction of the joint working protocol, case law and statutory guidance has changed the way in which young people are assessed and accommodated. The mediation and interim accommodation process remains the same, but all young people are now undergoing a formal assessment under the scope of the Children’s Act, which taken literally will assume that nearly all of them are vulnerable enough to meet section 20 status except in a handful of circumstances. As the statutory guidance was only issued in April 2010 the amendments to the protocol are still being developed, and there is not currently a dedicated social worker. However, there has been a rise in section 20 decisions given to young people, and thus a resultant decline in homelessness acceptances amongst the group. Finalised numbers of acceptances will not be ascertained by this review due to the amended protocol coming into place in the 2010/11 financial year; however they will factor into year end reports on the Homelessness Strategy.
For consideration: Work in partnership with social care on the commissioning of suitable accommodation and move-on options for 16-17 year olds.
Teenage pregnancy
Stockport’s new Teenage Pregnancy Strategy will come into place in late 2010, and its work will be on-going throughout bodies such as the Supporting Teenage Parents Task Group, of which housing is a key member. The strategy aims to ensure effective services are provided around contraception, sex and relationship education, support for young parents and access to training, education and employment. Consideration is also given to housing need, and current gaps in provision. As a result of the previous strategy a dedicated Resettlement Officer was assigned to support teen parents, and
92 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Strathclyde House is also now able to accommodate young mothers. Under the previous strategy the under 18 conception rate for Stockport has shown a downward trend; from 1998 to 2008 it has reduced by 16.5% to 36.1/1000 girls. However there are still ‘hotspots’ within the Borough where this has been less successful; for example, 20-30 teenage pregnancies occurred in the Brinnington and Central Ward in 2008; this is more than double the average rate across the Borough. The use and occupation of units at Strathclyde House will need to be monitored by the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy in order to assess the housing need of this group, and ensure resources are best used to prevent them becoming homeless in the future. In addition housing will remain a key stakeholder in the new Teenage Pregnancy Strategy, looking to carry forward recommendations within it.
Looked after children
Stockport Homes operates a joint working protocol with Children’s Services whereby withheld properties can be allocated to children leaving care. The aim of this protocol is to provide these vulnerable young people with a structured move into independent living, taking account of their preferences and support needs to ensure the move is sustainable. Each year Children’s Services provide the Rehousing Services Team with a forecast of young people who are due to turn 18 and leave care, so that they can be interviewed by the Special Needs Housing Officer and a suitable allocation considered. Not all young people will take up an allocation; other housing outcomes include friends and family, supported accommodation, student accommodation and the private sector. The following analysis is based on young people who have been rehoused via the protocol each year.
Fig. 76 Financial Year Interviewed Offer of accommodation accepted 2006/07 14 10 2007/08 15 10 2008/09 10 10 2009/10 16 11
As indicated above, where a withheld offer has not been made this can be due to a number of reasons including their rehousing preferences and their ability to live independently. In addition some young people may have been interviewed but still waiting for an allocation into the next financial year, due to their current housing circumstances or areas of choice. 34 more young people currently in the care of Children’s Services are due to turn 18 within the 2010/11; although again not all will be rehoused through this protocol, they will require some kind of housing options advice.
Looking in more detail at young people rehoused through the leaving care protocol, the following has been found about their current housing situation:
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 93 Fig. 77 Financial Year 2006/07 Accommodation status 2010 Case 1 Housed, transferred Stockport Homes properties – arrears on account, at risk Case 2 Evicted arrears Feb 2010 Case 3 Evicted arrears Sep 2009 Case 4 Housed by RSL Case 5 Evicted arrears May 2010 Case 6 Housed Case 7 Terminated tenancy November 2008 Case 8 Housed Case 9 Abandoned, arrears August 2008 Case 10 Evicted arrears November 2008
Two of the young people were evicted and two terminated or abandoned in 2008, when they were under 21; therefore they should have still been in receipt of leaving care services. A likely explanation may be that the young people were not yet ready for independent living. Two were evicted within the past six months, by which time they would have detached from leaving care services; having this support detach may have had a detrimental impact on these young people, highlighting the need for some kind of on-going monitoring or transitional support.
Fig. 78 Financial Year 2007/08 Accommodation status 2010 Case 1 Housed by RSL Case 2 Housed Case 3 Terminated, in custody Jan 2010 Case 4 Terminated, affordability Feb 2009 Case 5 Abandoned, in PRS Feb 2009 Case 6 Evicted ASB Sep 2009 Case 7 Abandoned March 2009 Case 8 Evicted arrears Oct 2009 Case 9 Housed Case 10 Housed – arrears on account, at risk
Unlike 2006/07, where young people have lost their accommodation the majority of cases (four) were due to abandonment or termination, rather than eviction. The levels of abandonment or termination raise concerns about the support these young people receive when taking on their tenancies.
Fig. 79 Financial Year 2007/08 Accommodation status 2010 Case 1 Housed Case 2 Housed
94 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Case 3 Housed Case 4 Housed Case 5 Housed Case 6 Housed – arrears on account, at risk Case 7 Housed Case 8 Rehoused after becoming homeless – arrears on account, at risk Case 9 Housed by RSL Case 10 Housed – arrears on account, at risk
All 10 of the young people rehoused through the leaving care protocol in 2008/09 are still in accommodation, although one young person became homeless due to issues experienced during their tenancy and was moved to another property. As these young people were rehoused more recently than previous years and are all still entitled to leaving care services, it is crucial that this support continues to ensure they remain in their tenancies unlike some cases in previous years.
The fact that none of these young people have been evicted or abandoned is a positive result of more rigorous assessment of these young people by the rehousing panel and Special Needs Housing Officer. As of the middle of the previous financial year, every young person leaving care was given a full interview to ensure they understood the implications of having a tenancy, their rights and responsibilities, sources of support and if necessary other rehousing options. Additionally this officer began monitoring tenancies allocated following on from this year, to ensure their tenancies were being maintained and interventions and support offered.
Fig. 80 Financial Year 2009/10 Accommodation status 2010 Case 1 Housed Case 2 Housed – arrears and ASB issues, at risk Case 3 Housed – arrears on account, at risk Case 4 Housed Case 5 Abandoned Feb 2010 Case 6 Housed Case 7 Housed by RSL Case 8 Housed Case 9 Housed Case 10 Housed Case 11 Housed
So far only one care leaver has lost their accommodation, due to abandonment; no further contact has been made by this young person. Two more currently have high levels of arrears and are being supported to address these by Stockport Homes and
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 95 their social workers.
Concerns have been expressed about the locations in which vulnerable young people are rehoused; for example placing care leavers in priority one areas such as Brinnington, or large estates such as Lancashire Hill due to the lack of age restrictions. However this does not seem to be the case; the following chart shows where young people have been housed over the review period:
Fig. 81
Lanc Hill Brinnington Offerton Edgeley/Cheadle Heath Cheadle Bredbury Heaton Chapel Other
It should be noted also that often young people choose these areas due to their existing connections with friends and families, and are always offered a choice over where they are rehoused.
Although there is a trend in some cases throughout the review period whereby care leavers whose tenancies have failed have usually done so in the first six months or shortly after care services detach at 21, this does not seem to be influenced by where the young person was rehoused. There is some trend at Lancashire Hill whereby a number have care leavers placed there have subsequently got into difficulties with arrears; this may be due to the high levels of service charges within this block, which in future need to make clear from the outset to young people requesting to be housed here.
The fact some tenancies have broken down suggests a need for more intensive monitoring of these tenancies. The number of young people leaving care in future is likely to be affected by recent case law and statutory guidance; therefore the strategy needs to find new ways of securing and sustaining accommodation.
Outside of the protocol, there have been some homelessness acceptances each year where the main reason for priority need is as a result of formerly being ‘looked after’. The graph below illustrates the number of acceptances each year throughout the
96 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 review period: Fig. 82
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
Under homelessness legislation, former relevant (looked after) children are automatically in a priority need category until their 21st birthday; after this there has to be a judgement of whether or not their time spent in care has rendered them vulnerable on an on-going basis. Therefore the numbers accepted are not just due to those who have not been accommodated by the protocol, but cover a wide range of ages and housing issues.
For consideration: • Implement monitoring system / joint working protocol with Children’s Services for care leavers who have become tenants. especially within first 12 months and upon their 21st birthday • Increase support provision from Social Care to care leavers in independent tenancies.
Gypsies and travellers
For many years monitoring has been in place to record the numbers of Gypsies and Travellers approaching homeless services and using Homechoice. In addition, health services to these groups have acted in liaison; records however show very low numbers. Stockport currently has no pitch provision for gypsies and travellers within the borough, nor does it have an identifiable community. There have also been no instances of homeless applicants declaring themselves to be from this community.
Under the Regional Spatial Strategy there are proposed plans to create pitch provision in Stockport; under the interim draft policy L6 – Scale and Distribution of Gypsy and Travellers Pitch Provision – 35 pitches could be provided by 2016. However this
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 97 provision was forecast in 2007; since then the new Government has announced plans to change the rules by which Gypsies and Travellers can legally occupy sites29. These rules include:
• new incentives to build authorised sites via the ‘New Homes Bonus Scheme’; • abolition of Whitehall guidance, allowing local planning rules to be assimilated for travelling and settled communities; and • stronger powers for councils to tackle unauthorised development.
Due to the proposed changes to how targets are set or what will be built, it is not possible to speculate on future demand for the service from this community. However, demand has not been identified by this review.
Armed forces
Homelessness amongst individuals leaving the armed forces is low in Stockport. This is partly due to there being no forces base located within the area, and also due to changes giving current and ex-service men and women local connections to the areas in which they have been based; they may therefore choose not to return to Stockport upon leaving service.
Two non-priority applicants became homeless due to leaving the forces in 2006/07, and two in 2009/10; there were none in the other years. In deciding whether someone is ‘vulnerable’ as a result of leaving the forces, the Code of Guidance suggests that the housing authority may wish to take into account the following factors: • The length of time the applicant spent in the armed forces. • The type of service the applicant was engaged in. • Whether the applicant spent any time in a military hospital. • Whether HM Forces’ medical and welfare advisers have judged an individual to be particularly vulnerable. • The length of time since the applicant left the armed forces, and whether he or she had been able to obtain and/or maintain accommodating during that time. • Whether the applicant has any existing support networks.
Over the review period only one person was awarded a full homeless duty after becoming homeless from the forces; the effect of their time in service was also a secondary vulnerability to other issues.
Although instances of ex-armed forces personnel presenting homeless in Stockport are rare, the Housing Options Team is still provided with training and information sharing to enable them to provide effective housing advice to those who do find themselves facing homelessness in the Borough.
29. Accessed Additionally Stockport’s Allocations Policy offers a category of points or reasonable via CLG website, preference to those being discharged from service with a view to returning to the August 2010 Borough.
98 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Eligibility (EU nationals)
Homelessness legislation sets out within it who is eligible for assistance from local authorities. Generally speaking, a person would not be eligible if they were deemed to be a “person from abroad” who was either subject to immigration control, or had other conditions on their residence such as no recourse to public funds. However the legislation becomes complicated by the fact that some groups do fall under immigration control, but can be eligible for assistance; for example refugees or those who have resided in the UK for five years and consequently been considered as habitually resident. Additionally there are rules for some European Union workers around whether they are working and for how long, or whether they are actively seeking work.
Since 2006/07 there have been very few homelessness decisions made on EU nationals. The chart below gives a clear picture of this: Fig. 83
4
Full Duty 3 Non Priority
2 Not Eligable
1
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
No EU nationals were given a full homeless acceptance until the last financial year, and even then this was only one household. A higher but still fairly small number of applicants were found not to be eligible; however this covers the aforementioned restricted groups as well as those who do not qualify as ‘workers’. The low number of homeless EU nationals could be due to self-sufficiency through most entering the country as workers, or possibly a lack of awareness of the service and their eligibility.
Eligibility has recently risen in prominence on the homelessness agenda due to recent case law about EU nationals. Under the cases of Teixera v Lambeth LBC and Harrow LBC v Ibrahim EU nationals, or their children in the case of Ibrahim, have been found to be eligible for assistance under homelessness legislation. This applies whereby an EU national has an unconditional right to reside in the UK regardless of employment status if he is the parent and primary carer of a child in education here, presuming they entered in the first instance as either self-sufficient or a worker. A non-EU national,
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 99 who is similarly the primary carer of a child in education, has an unconditional right to reside in the UK if she is married to an European Economic Area (EEA) national who has worked in the UK. This judgement has implications for the training of housing and advice staff; there may also be implications for a potential increase in homelessness applications and enquiries.
For consideration: Undertake further review of EEA national population in Stockport following 2011 Census to ascertain current housing situations and potential future demand.
Rough sleeping
Despite government guidance stating that counts can be carried out on a discretionary basis or returned as estimates, Stockport Council and its partners have opted to undertake official rough sleeper counts on a periodic basis, as well as working together in response to sightings of rough sleeping. In all cases the Housing Options Team will respond to identification of a rough sleeper through a site visit within 24 hours. Site visits are conducted by searching areas where rough sleepers are likely to be bedded down and encouraging anyone found to engage with services and take up temporary accommodation. These areas are identified by intelligence gathered from presentations made to the local authority previously, the Police / emergency services, existing service users and local charities / voluntary organisations.
The number of people found during organised multi-agency rough sleeper counts in Stockport has been low for several years:
Fig. 84 Year Number found 1999 4 2001 2 2004 2 2007 1 2009 0
It is important to bear in mind that this figure only reflects anyone identified on that night in the locations searched; it does not therefore mean that there have only been nine rough sleepers identified in the last 10 years. For example in 2009 18 people who accessed the service stated to have previously been sleeping rough, demonstrating an on-going need to provide services to this group. Their reasons for sleeping rough were stated as follows:
100 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Fig. 85
Eviction from previous home Prison Friends / family Fear of violence / harassment Loss of employment Relationship breakdown Domestic violence
Identifying factors such as eviction, abandonment, loss of employment and harassment are useful because they show that rough sleeping is preventable. They identify a need for tenancy support and life skills, the Council, Stockport Homes and their partners can provide to individuals identified.
Despite contact made not all rough sleepers will engage with the service and pursue a homeless application The graph below shows the numbers who stated to have slept rough where decisions were made in the review period:
Fig. 86
25 Priority need
20 Non priority
15
10
5
0
2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 As explored previously, ‘rough sleeping’ as a stated circumstance of homelessness amongst non-priority applicants has increased over the review period. However, it is important to recognise that not every person who states their circumstances to be rough sleeping will have been confirmed as having been doing so; it may be that they felt at risk as a result of other issues, rather than being an entrenched rough sleeper. Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 101 People who have been sleeping rough, especially those who are ‘entrenched’ in this way of life, often present with complex needs. They can be mistrusting of services, misunderstand the implications of accepting support offered, or feel as though they cannot access mainstream support due to financial, physical and mental barriers. Additionally, it can be difficult to retain some entrenched rough sleepers in temporary accommodation due to difficulty in coping with rules and boundaries. The previous Homelessness Strategy developed outreach and support work to provide a holistic service to these individuals, but this still requires further work if Stockport Council is to achieve the previous Government’s target of ending rough sleeping by 201230.
Looking in more detail at those identified by the Special Needs Housing Officer in 2009 the following issues were found to recur:
Fig. 87
Arrears
Drugs
Mental health issues
Alcohol
Physical health issues
Joint working cannot be underestimated in addressing complex needs; therefore the new Homelessness Strategy should look to build upon existing protocols and arrangements. It can also learn from the ‘personalisation’ approach taken by the CLG’s rough sleeping champions. Although these champions received extensive funding, similar incentives, flexibility, crisis response and support can be replicated on a smaller budget with appropriate planning and finding out what it is each client wants and needs.
The new Government commenced a public consultation on evaluating the extent of rough sleeping, which closed in September 2010. The subsequent guidance included changing the definition of rough sleeping to go further than including those ‘bedded down’; for example, including those in tents, doorways or stood near bedding sites. It also suggests co-ordinated regional and sub-regional counts as good practice, especially as many rough sleepers move between local authority boundaries. Most 30. CLG, No One significant though is that local authorities now have to provide an estimate, or Left Out, 2008 undertake a count if necessary, every year. Deciding whether or not to undertake
102 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 an official count will depend upon evidence of rough sleeping on a regular basis, or an increase in numbers. If this is not apparent and an estimate is to be made, this should be based on an estimate of the number present on a single night, and based on intelligence from local interested parties and housing records. The guidance does urge caution however when considering intelligence about street drinkers, beggars and those attending day centres (as opposed to night shelters), as evidence has found that these people are often housed. The Government estimates that under these new proposals, officially recorded rough sleeping figures will treble. This will obviously have implications for the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy, as it will need to seek to reduce this most visible form of homelessness.
For consideration: • Complete and establish work already commenced on the rough sleepers protocol / ‘virtual team’ in developing a personalisation approach to meeting the needs of rough sleepers. • Undertake joint rough sleeping count with neighbouring Greater Manchester authorities.
Finance, benefits and debt
Income, expenditure and debt levels have been high on the agenda for homelessness and in a wider political sense for some time now due to the recession. As detailed previously, referrals to Debt Advice, Welfare Rights and the CAB are the most common source of signposting from the Housing Options Team. Welfare Rights have also reported that overall referrals to their service in the past year have doubled. British debt has now reached record levels, with consumers twice as indebted as those in Europe and 28% of borrowers owing over £10,000 in 2008/0931. According to a recent study by the Debt Advice Foundation the average debt owed in Stockport is cited to be £32,438, made up of approximately 5.2 creditors; additionally 12.8 per 10,000 households have declared themselves bankrupt over the last 12 months, an increase of 25%.
The recession has undoubtedly had an impact on increased housing need and homelessness; a recent report by the National Housing Federation found a 40% growth in social housing waiting lists in the past five years, and estimated overcrowded households at 565,00032. Furthermore, the average income now needed for a mortgage in the North West is £40,323. In Stockport the growth has been 38% (not including those registered for a transfer); as of the end of the 2009/10 financial year 6.2% of households in Stockport were registered for local authority housing. These 31. Office for problems in part will need to be addressed via Stockport Homes’ allocations review, National Statistics, 2009 but their link to homelessness is clear. Inability to access the housing market due to limited finance can result in homelessness, and unemployment remains a strong cause 32. NHF, ‘Home of reduced social mobility. Truths’, 2009 Affordability has become especially prominent on the agenda due to forthcoming
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 103 benefit cuts announced in the recent emergency budget. These will come into force from October 2011, and will affect customers claiming benefits in several ways, including the following:
• All Incapacity Benefit claimants to be re-assessed for ability to work. • Tax Credits not available to those earning above £40,000 and Child Benefit levels 33. Data sourced from Profiling frozen. Stockport Live, • Local Housing Allowance to be adjusted to 30th percentile of Broad Rental Market December 2009 Area and aligned to Consumer Price Index. • Removal of £15 excess of Local Housing Allowance from April 2011. 34. Sourced from http:// www.voa.gov. 20.3% of all households in Stockport are claiming some element of housing and/or uk/LHADirect/ council tax benefits33; therefore a significant proportion of households are going to be LHA-emergency- affected by the benefit cuts announced. budget- news-2010.htm Although at this stage it is not possible to accurately assess the level of impact, 35. DWP, Impact these cuts are likely to hit private sector tenants the hardest, as they could face a of Housing sharp drop in Local Housing Allowance. Since its establishment in 2008, the Local Benefit proposals, Housing Allowance has seen private rents in Stockport largely come in line with the July 2010 rates offered by Housing Benefit. The Valuation Office Agency34 has estimated the maximum impact of the reduction in Local Housing Allowance on weekly benefit levels in Stockport to be as follows:
Single One Two Three Four Five room bedroom bed- bed- bed- bed- Fig. 88 rooms rooms rooms rooms 2010 £63.29 £103.56 £126.58 £149.59 £207.12 £298.03 2011 £56.42 £96.66 £115.07 £136.93 £182.96 N/A (estimated) Reduction £6.87 £6.90 £11.51 £12.66 £24.16 £115.07
The DWP has issued a report which estimates the number and overall percentage of households that will ‘lose out’ as a result of the reduction in Local Housing Allowance35. The figures for Stockport are as follows:
No. of Single One Two Three Four Five rooms room bedroom bed- bed- bed- bed- Fig. 89 rooms rooms rooms rooms % losing 90 (27%) 450 (42%) 740 (49%) 280 (57%) 100 (91%) 30 (93%)
They furthermore gives figures on the number of households affected overall by other reductions, including the removal of the £15 excess and recalculation of allowances in the 30th percentile:
104 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Fig. 90 No. of Single One Two Three Four Five rooms room bedroom bed- bed- bed- bed- rooms rooms rooms rooms % losing 340 1090 1530 500 110 30 (100%) (100%) (100%) (100%) (100%) (100%)
The DWP give a different estimation to the Valuation Office Agency (VOA) on average loss in housing benefit per week to the VOA taking into account all of the above measures, which gives a more positive result for larger households, but not across the range of property sizes. These are based on an extract from current cases, and are also only to be taken as indicative:
Fig. 91 No. of Single One Two Three Four Five rooms room bedroom bed- bed- bed- bed- rooms rooms rooms rooms Reduction £8 £9 £12 £13 £17 £42
Evidently families in larger accommodation are going to be hit hardest by this as the five bedroom allowance is removed, but every claimant is going to be affected. Those in four bedroom properties face a potential loss of almost £100 each month, and five bedrooms considerably more. As larger families in receipt of full Local Housing Allowance are also likely to be entitled to a significant proportion of child tax credits, it is expected that these will have to take the burden of the extra rent; however this will still be a large dent in their income. Should households be unable to afford these reductions, there may be an impact on the number of families presenting as homeless and needing temporary accommodation.
Single applicants and those in one bedroom flats face to lose around £21 per month; although a smaller amount, benefit claimants on full Local Housing Allowance are likely to be in receipt of JSA or ESA, and this will take away a significant portion of their weekly income. Additionally the number of individuals claiming JSA is likely to increase due to forthcoming reviews of Incapacity Benefit and ESA claimants; currently 57.9 out of every 1000 people in Stockport claim some form of incapacity or disablement benefit, so large groups stand to experience a major change to their income. The Government have announced an increase in the Discretionary Housing Payment budget to deal with significant hardships, but this is not a long term solution to cuts. It will also lead to a greater demand for financial and benefit advice, which are already over-subscribed.
The reasoning behind and potential solution to benefit cuts is employment, both by encouraging those out of work to seek it, and justifying the Housing Benefit bill to those in employment not in receipt of Local Housing Allowance. Not all groups however will be able to seek employment; Age UK estimate that 80,000 older people will be affected in the private sector, and work needs to be done to identify how many this amounts to in Stockport. There is a hope that cuts in benefit rates will
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 105 force landlords to reduce rents, and thus make working more affordable to those on low incomes. Whilst being mindful of the implications for current claimants, the forthcoming homelessness strategy needs to establish how it can support those affected.
For consideration: • Promote awareness of ‘in-work’ benefits, such as tax credits and housing and council tax benefit. • Progress accredited landlord scheme / changes to Deposit Scheme to increase supply of private rented properties in line with LHA rates. • Increase debt counselling capacity in the Borough. • Utilise additional Discretionary Housing Payments to counteract largest reductions to families, and elderly people affected by reductions.
Education, skills and employment
Worklessness and the aforementioned themes around financial exclusion are clearly linked to homelessness, poorly cared for estates, ASB and the loss of tenancies through debt and rent arrears. Unemployment in Stockport was 2.5% at the time of the 2001 Census; 3.6% of Stockport’s working age population were claiming JSA, of which 7.6% having claimed it for 12 months or more. A significant area of concern is unemployment amongst young people; 6.8% of 16-24 year olds in the Borough were claiming JSA36.
Equally of concern a recent report by Crisis stated that only 15% of homeless people surveyed were in employment, with six in ten having low or no qualifications37. Analysis by the Government has found that 1.9 million children now live in workless households in Britain. Furthermore another study found that only 11% of homeless people felt inadequately supported by current employment agencies such as the Job Centre; this is despite 97% expressing a desire to work in the future38. This is reflective of the need for a more specialised strategy for dealing with this population.
The Welfare Reform Act of 2009 gave an indication of the direction in which the previous Government was heading in addressing worklessness and financial exclusion. ‘Work for your benefits schemes’ and New Deals for lone parents were examples 36. Data sourced cited, as well as focussed interviews and action plans for the long term unemployed. from Profiling Within the new government there have been announcements that these schemes will Stockport Live, December 2009 be scrapped, and a new ‘work programme’ incorporating private sector providers implemented in 2011. This will be alongside existing support for short-term job 37. Crisis, Homes seekers from the DWP / Job Centre. The Council, Stockport Homes and their partners and Jobs for All, have gone some way to addressing the worklessness amongst their customers; 2009 for example recruiting an Employment Support Officer and an Educational Officer 38. St Mungos, for schools. Stockport Homes has also participated in a Supported Employment Work Matters, programme, offering placements, work experience and employment positions to June 2010 disadvantaged groups, including those who were formerly homeless. Furthermore
106 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 customers in temporary accommodation can access a range of ‘Skills for Life’ courses in order to improve everyday skills and in some cases their chances of obtaining employment, although places on these are limited.
A key barrier to achieving results in reducing worklessness is the availability of jobs within Stockport; in 2009 the annual survey for hours and earnings found that there were 104,000 jobs in the Borough39, which is well below the number of working age adults at 204,812. Evidently not all of these adults are fit for work, but the figures do illustrate the competition for jobs within the borough. Whilst some are able to commute, low pay, transport connections and educational and vocational attainment have an effect on job seekers in certain areas. As the Borough authority and social landlord respectively the Council and Stockport Homes have a responsibility to help maximise skills and employment opportunities for all residents within the Borough.
Providing a degree of priority for those customers who are working or volunteering is likely to be a key theme of the allocations review. Following government guidance in 2009, all local authorities were advised to review their allocations policy to ensure it is ‘fair and flexible’, ensured greater mobility, created mixed and sustainable communities, and supports people who are in or seeking work40. Stockport’s allocations review has commenced, and is looking at ways of adopting these recommendations; for example:
• Setting aside a proportion of lettings in priority one areas for those in work. • Applying additional priority to applicants with a ‘community connection’ via employment, volunteering, training etc. • Increasing mobility for existing tenants wishing to move to take up employment, training and education opportunities.
Consultation with customers and stakeholders will determine exactly how the policy is changed, and how certain groups are prioritised. Although homeless applicants are in a ‘reasonable preference’ group under allocations legislation, it is still beneficial to encourage them to engage in employment, volunteering or training in order to maximise their rehousing prospects. Doing so may also have an effect on homelessness prevention, as applicants become aware of how to resolve their situation through gainful occupation prior to situations breaking down. Furthermore any properties set aside for those seeking employment and other opportunities are likely to be in ‘priority one’ neighbourhood renewal areas, with the aim of creating mixed, sustainable communities here and preventing tenancy breakdown.
39. Office Since the emergency budget has been announced, there have been further plans for National for getting communities back into work. Further reviews of the benefits system are Statistics, 2009 underway on a national level, such as reassessing incapacity benefit claimants and bringing benefits in line with consumer rather than retail prices. Additionally the 40. CLG, Fair and Flexible, Government has announced plans to introduce a universal benefit to ensure that work December 2009 pays, and customers are not discouraged from seeking employment due to changes in benefits. Now more than ever the homelessness strategy needs to focus on getting people back in to work and maximising income and affordability. Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 107 For consideration: • Investigate to use of the H3 group in creating social enterprise / training opportunities • Increase range of Skills for Life courses in temporary accommodation
Repossessions
Also linked to the recession and unsustainable levels of borrowing and debt is the threat of repossession. As detailed previously, Stockport Homes now employs a dedicated officer who utilises the range of tools brought in by the Government to help prevent repossessions, as well as administering a repossession prevention fund. A key element of the work undertaken has been to raise awareness of help available to those facing mortgage difficulties and ensure they can access services. This has included initiatives such as:
• Home visits or alternative contact made with all households in the Borough where notification is received that a lender is initiating possession action (a legal requirement under the ‘Pre-Action’ Protocol) • Regular adverts in the local press alongside the ‘Homechoice advert’ • Promotions in supermarkets, GP surgeries, schools, Job Centre, libraries and information centres • Mail outs to Council Leaseholders • Links with and referrals from solicitors and officers working at the magistrates’ court.
The short-term CLG grant funding for a specialist officer and Mortgage Repossession Fund has been an important factor in helping prevent a rise in repossessions, and so homelessness, in Stockport. In practice, the activity of the officer has proved more effective in preventing repossessions than actual payments from the fund, but where financial support has been needed this has been a valuable intervention leading to successful outcomes (i.e. preventing families losing their homes and entering the homelessness system with further costs to the public purse).
The previous strategy could not have predicted the housing market crash that led to the current focus on mortgage repossessions. At the end of 2009 72,000 orders for possession had been made, and 48,000 homes had been repossessed across the country. In the first quarter of 2010 a further 9,800 have been repossessed, although this is a fall on the previous year41. In Stockport in 2009 535 homes were repossessed; although this was a reduction of 30% on the previous year many households will remain vulnerable if the economic climate does not improve. 41. Statistics sourced from Homeless acceptances due to mortgage repossessions have historically been low with CLG website a slight rise in the last year, as the chart below shows:
108 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Fig. 92
15
12
9
6
3
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
Non-priority homelessness due to mortgage arrears has also been low, with only one decision made in 2006/07 and 2008/09, 2 in 2007/08 and 3 in 2009/10. This is generally due to homeowners resolving their own situation, or advice provided by the specialist officer or other advice agencies.
More recently the reason for the low levels of homelessness amongst is due to the recent forbearance offered by lenders and awareness raising campaigns by the Government, as discussed previously in this review. The Housing Options Team also generally has more time to assist struggling homeowners and prevent homelessness, as the repossession process is lengthy and homeowners are more willing to fight to save their homes than for example private sector tenants.
Stockport has a high level of home ownership, reported to be 77% at the 2001 Census. However only 32.9% of this number owned their homes outright; this leaves a significant proportion of homeowners with outstanding mortgages and secured loans which could be vulnerable to the current economic climate. The majority of owner- occupiers reside in the Bramhall South, Marple North and Marple South wards, where they make up between 81-93% of all households. These areas are also amongst the most expensive in Stockport, and due to high house prices may not qualify for some of the Government’s rescue schemes – for example, Mortgage Rescue will only apply to houses worth under £135,000 (although there is some flexibility); and Support for Mortgage Interest will not be given on loans of over £200,000. These limits leave some groups in these areas more exposed to risk.
Although owner-occupying levels are not as high as in the aforementioned ward, Reddish North, Stepping Hill and Manor have the highest levels of outstanding loans on mortgages properties, ranging from 63-78%.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 109 An additional concern for repossessions is the June budget; the fixed rate interest for Support for Mortgage Interest is to be set at the ‘average mortgage rate’ by the Bank of England from October 2010, and VAT is set to rise in January 2011. There are also uncertainties about the continued funding of the repossession prevention schemes; the Government has already announced the Homeowners Mortgage Support will end in April 2011, although this had only assisted 32 households nationwide42. The Mortgage Rescue Scheme will remain for now and the fast-track team will be disbanded, which could lead to further administrative delays for families applying to the scheme. These schemes, alongside the repossessions pre-action protocol, have encouraged lenders to offer more forbearance measures and prevent repossessions rising; over 20,000 households have also benefited from housing advice from local authorities and 30,000 have been offered lender forbearance measures. However the Council for Mortgage Lenders has forecast up to 53,000 repossessions this year, which will be exacerbated by aforementioned benefit cuts and increases in interest rates. The homelessness strategy still needs to be conscious therefore of the threat of homelessness from the owner occupied sector.
For consideration: • Increase awareness raising of advice services – targeting areas with high outstanding mortgages / identified trends in repossession action. • Continue to fund and promote the role of the specialist housing officer, and utilise the remaining Repossessions Prevention Fund.
Arrears
Homeless acceptances due to arrears have been drastically reduced over the review period, from a high of 13 in 2006/07 to none in the most recent financial year. Additionally, intentionally homeless decisions for this reason have reduced.
Fig. 93 15
12
9
6 42. CLG, Evaluation of the Mortgage Rescue Scheme 3 and Homeowners Mortgage Support, July 0 2010 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
110 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 This is clearly a reflection of the effectiveness of preventative measures introduced in the last Homelessness Strategy, including:
• all Housing Options Officers have been Housing Benefit verification and Discretionary Housing Payment trained; • the Exceptional Payment Fund has been instrumental in clearing arrears where Housing Benefit funds cannot be accessed; • strong links to Debt Advice and Welfare Rights have enabled customers struggling with arrears to maximise their income and set up affordable repayment plans; • an eviction protocol between Customer Finance, Resettlement and the Housing Options Team has been established to prevent evictions amongst existing Stockport Homes tenants; • protocols have begun to be developed between the Housing Options Team and RSLs to forewarn of tenants threatened with eviction; and • question on Homechoice application forms asking for reasons for moving, financial difficulties and other issues.
The protocol between Stockport Homes’ Housing Options Team and the RSLs has so far only been agreed by two housing associations; this is an action which will be carried over to the new Homelessness Strategy. However despite not fully achieving this goal there have been relatively few presentations or decisions from customers evicted from RSL tenancies; just 10 were recorded over the review period, with five cases requiring advice only, three being found intentionally homeless and two further households prevented from becoming homeless by the Housing Options Team.
Although homelessness due to arrears amongst Stockport Homes’ tenants has been reduced through the aforementioned protocol with Customer Finance and Resettlement, analysis has highlighted that arrears do still continue to present a problem amongst existing tenants. The Financial Inclusion Team found in October 2009 that there were concerns around the following areas:
• Arrears in properties with heating charges; this is where an additional amount is added on to rent charges which cannot be covered by housing benefit rebate. • Higher percentage of BME tenants with arrears. • Higher than average arrears of tenants aged 30 years and under. • 69.7% of total debt owed by 7.5% of tenants.
The analysis found that tenants living in multi-storey blocks and maisonettes owed proportionately more on average; however it also found that these tenants were less likely to be in receipt of Housing Benefit, and therefore may be struggling on a low income. The lack of age restrictions on these properties may also have an effect, as young people may struggle to cope with their first tenancy; this may also explain why the majority of arrears are concentrated in non-age restricted areas such as Brinnington. Additionally introductory tenants had higher arrears than other tenures, again demonstrating that some households may struggle with their initial tenancy. Financial Inclusion’s analysis of current arrears is useful in identifying future potential homelessness, and for implementing a new range of preventative measures. Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 111 Despite a reduction in homelessness due to arrears amongst priority need cases there has been less change amongst non-priority cases:
Fig. 94
6 Arrears on private sector
4 Arrears on RSL/LA
2
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
As explored previously, all tenants currently in receipt of Housing Benefit stand to be affected by cuts introduced by the emergency budget as of October 2011. This includes social housing tenants, and will especially affect those who are under- occupying (i.e. in properties which have more rooms than the household is deemed to need) or have other adults living at home, i.e. non-dependants. This could have an adverse effect on levels of arrears, and lead to increased homelessness due to affordability issues. There are indicators that people in the private sector are already struggling; the Consumer Credit Counselling Service announced in June that it had seen a dramatic rise in calls from private tenants worried about eviction43. Householders will also face additional pressures as the cost of living could become more expensive in 2011 as VAT is set to rise to 20% in January.
For consideration: • Financial Inclusion Team in target young tenants with arrears in priority areas for example, Brinnington. • Carry out work via Deposit Scheme, Landlords Forum and other groups to target 43. CCC press financial inclusion advice at private tenants. release 25th June 2010, accessed via http://www.cccs. Offending co.uk/Portals/0/ Documents/ Crime was cited as one of the main concerns in the preceding consultation and review media/ pressreleases/ of the Community Strategy, especially ASB and inter-generational conflict. Crime Renters-seeking- rates in Stockport have historically been the lowest in Greater Manchester, but public eviction-help- satisfaction with the ways crime is dealt with are not always reflective of this. Crime press-release.pdf and homelessness are often directly linked through a cycle of one leading to another,
112 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 and therefore of immediate concern to the Homelessness Strategy 2011.
Being released from prison to no fixed abode has led to subsequent homeless acceptances (4 in 2006/07 and 3 in 2009/10), but no one in the review period has been found to be vulnerable as a result of being in custody. In order to consider vulnerability the Code of Guidance suggests a local authority should take into account:
• the length of time the applicant served in custody or detention; • whether the applicant is receiving supervision from a criminal justice agency, and have regard to any advice from them on their perceived vulnerability; • the length of time since the applicant was released from custody or detention, and the extent to which the applicant had been able to obtain and/or maintain accommodation during that time; and • whether the applicant has any existing support networks.
Due to the lack of applicants found to be vulnerable as a result of custody, it is likely that most of the cases being dealt with have either not served long-term sentences, or have been released to existing support networks. The potential pitfalls of prison release, such as returning to a volatile situation or detaching from support, is also negated by the early intervention of the Housing Options Officer for offenders, who undertakes interviews whilst the individual is still in custody.
Despite the small number of homeless acceptances from ex-offenders being released from prison, there are still a number of non-priority homeless applicants and many others seeking general housing advice; this was demonstrated earlier in this review by the 307 referrals made to the Stockport Housing Offender Service in its first year of operation. Part of the explanation for the rise in non-priority homeless cases amongst those leaving prison may also be due to the intervention of this service, picking up cases which would have been discharged to no fixed abode and could have remained undetected for some time. Fig. 94 15
12
9
6
3
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 113 Housing plays a key role in reducing re-offending and improving life chances for ex-offenders; the National Offender Management Service state:
“Accommodation can provide the anchor for a previously chaotic life and act as a springboard for other crucial steps such as getting and keeping a job, and accessing health care or drug treatment”44
As explored previously in this document, there is a proven demand for services relating to offenders from both the Housing Support Point and the Housing Options Officer for offenders. Both of these schemes have been successful in securing accommodation and positive outcomes for offenders, and contributing to an overall reduction in crime and re-offending rates in the borough. For example, the Spotlight integrated offender management initiative that monitor high risk and priority and prolific offenders have reported a 38.5% reduction in offending levels in their target group whilst Stockport Homes have administered the Stockport Housing Offender Service. Non-statutory offenders who have served sentences for less than 12 months are also assisted, giving recognition to this group having high re-offending rates without support and suitable accommodation. Additionally, this service has undoubtedly contributed to National Indicators around crime reduction and outcomes for offenders. However as the scheme goes further into its second year, it will be important to continue to monitor outcomes and in particular focus on repeat presentations from those who have re- offended and subsequently lost their accommodation.
The CLG commissioned a good practice guide on meeting housing need and homelessness prevention amongst ex-offenders in November 2009. This was overseen by a steering group comprised of representatives from the Ministry of Justice, the Home Office and the Youth Justice Board. The good practice guide highlights the importance of multi-agency working and effective resettlement of offenders, realising that their support is not an issue solely for justice authorities. The guide identifies three key activities in relation to preventing homelessness and meeting housing need amongst ex-offenders:
• Partnership working to increase capacity and diversity in housing provision • Multi-agency approaches to early assessment and planning • The provision of comprehensive and continuing support
The Stockport Housing Offender Service has been very effective in establishing 44. Ministry of Justice, partnerships with offender management services, as well as other agencies such as Compendium Supporting People providers and the Community Drugs and Alcohol Teams. As the of research scheme has only been in operation for a year however it is recognised that there will and analysis on still be gaps in the service, as well as opportunities to expand its scope of operation. the Offender Assessment System 2006- The guide also outlines barriers for ex-offenders in accessing services; these include 2009 social landlord’s perceptions of them as potential tenants; financial difficulty accessing the private sector; complex needs unable to be met by traditional housing support; and a shortage of accommodation on a whole. The Stockport Housing Offender
114 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Service has gone some way in overcoming these barriers; for example through Probation funding the Deposit Scheme has become available to those under Probation supervision. However an action left incomplete by the previous homelessness strategy is the engagement of other housing providers in rehousing Priority Prolific Offenders in particular.
Looking at the case studies in the guide, a gap analysis can be undertaken on services currently available in Stockport. One area of good practice which could be replicated is the Yorkshire and Humberside Bail Support Scheme; currently providers in Stockport are often unable or unwilling to provide accommodation during bail periods. Such a scheme is proven to be beneficial as it encourages offenders to meet their conditions of bail, provides effective monitoring and support during this time and intervenes to prevent non-appearances at court or non-compliance with orders which could lead to imprisonment. Another area which is cited as good practice is providing holistic assessments to all ex-offenders; this includes short and long-term provision, such as: • assistance with benefit claims; • registering with a GP; • provision of ‘move on packs’ for example, bedding and toiletries; • transport; • mediation; • linking with community support; and • accessing education, training and employment.
The guide suggests this can be achieved by recruiting community based workers or other support services; expansion of support services therefore needs to be investigated in the new Homelessness Strategy. The Council is already exploring commissioning options with Catch 22, who will provide a similar service to young offenders as the example in Humberside. Supporting People are also currently reviewing their funding of housing related support services, which include Threshold, NACRO and English Churches relating to offenders, which may have implications for the sustainability of future prevention work.
A new service to reduce re-offending being planned in Stockport is a problem solving court. These courts usually specialise in specific themes, for example drugs or domestic violence, and are aimed at those with especially chaotic lifestyles to break the cycle of offending and tackling underlying problems associated with their criminal behaviour. The benefit of these courts is that they create a strong partnership between agencies, as they can all become part of the offender’s particular order and offer an alternative to a custodial sentence; for example, compulsory engagement with drug testing or attendance at anger management classes. A dedicated magistrate or district judge will also sit on each case, ensuring consistency in offender management. Stockport Council and Stockport Homes are part of the steering group for the court planned in the Borough, and therefore there is scope for housing to be included in orders for compliance or to identify offenders at risk of homelessness at an early stage.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 115 For consideration: • Develop the engagement of housing providers in the Priority Prolific Offenders (PPO) Protocol to support crime reduction strategies. • Assist in the establishment of a problem solving court – for example, adding housing to supervision orders. • Work with Catch 22 in establishing youth offending preventative work, for example through sourcing accommodation or undertaking housing outreach.
ASB
ASB has links to sustainable communities and as a cause and result of homelessness. It can manifest itself in harassment, nuisance, and in more extreme cases threatened or actual instances of violence. Stockport Council and Stockport Homes each have a dedicated ASB Team and victim support service, but there are still occasions when households find themselves presenting to Housing Options as victims of such behaviour. Section 177(1A) of the Housing Act 1996 provides that violence means ‘violence from another person or threats of violence which are likely to be carried out’. The Code of Guidance also lists harassment as a relative factor for local authorities to consider when decided whether someone is homeless or threatened with homelessness, stating that local authorities should consider whether this harassment only just falls short of violence or threatened violence, and would make the applicant’s accommodation unreasonable to continue living in. Therefore it is possible that some households do become homeless due to extreme ASB.
The table below shows the number of homeless acceptances over the review period due to actual or threatened violence from people outside the home / associated with applicants, and from harassment: Fig. 95
10 Violence from 8 associates Other forms 6 of violence
4 Harassment
2
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
116 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 The graph demonstrates that violence due to associates has increased gradually over the review period; ‘associates’ could include extended family members from outside the home, friends and other known perpetrators. Other forms of violence, for example without a known perpetrator, have been in decline. Although the middle of the review period saw a reduction in levels of harassment resulting in homelessness, this increased in the last year to seven cases. Violence from associates and harassment were one of the main causes of homelessness in the last financial year; outside of the main five detailed previously.
Instances of violence from associates and harassment have also resulted in non- priority homelessness: Fig. 96
6 Harassment
4 Violence from associates
2
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
These results demonstrate a need for more targeted efforts at reducing ASB and violence across a range of tenures.
In 2009/10 13 Stockport Homes tenants sought housing advice for harassment from neighbours or other individuals targeting their property. A further two reported actual use of violence. Of these 15 total cases only two led to an actual homeless acceptance; the remainder were resolved by co-operation with the ASB Team, Police and comprehensive housing advice. This demonstrates the effectiveness of the holistic service Stockport Homes provides, but the same tools cannot always be deployed to non-tenants. The Council’s ASBAT scheme counteracts anti-social behaviour in the private sector, and individual RSLs have individually determined procedures; however evidence on how effective these are and what awareness there is amongst Stockport residents’ needs to be investigated.
Crime reported as ASB is disproportionate in certain areas around Stockport; for example ASB crime is 180% above the Borough average in the Brinnington and Central ward, and 42% above in Reddish North. Conversely ASB crime in Marple and
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 117 Bramhall is 37-45% below the average. There is clearly evidence therefore for targeted efforts in certain areas, as well as providing a joined-up service between different landlords and agencies to counteract ASB.
For consideration: • Influence and implement Allocations Review for better use of social need points. • Develop actions with the ASB and ASBAT Teams around awareness raising and support services, for example, by incorporating the Volunteering Scheme.
Drugs and alcohol
Research demonstrates that homelessness and substance misuse are often, although not always, closely linked. Homelessness can make it difficult for service users to access abstinence services, and when placed in temporary or moved on to settled accommodation others are unable to maintain this due to breaking house rules over drugs and alcohol, or leading a chaotic lifestyle. The Council and Stockport Homes have a good working relationship with the Community Drugs and Alcohol Teams, particularly in having dedicated outreach workers linked to housing services. More recently these workers have also been able to offer home detox via Brindale House, and provide floating support to service users who are withdrawing from substance misuse. 45. SP outcomes obtained from monthly Substance misuse does not usually lead to a person being ‘vulnerable’ under discharge homelessness legislation; over the timescale of the review only three individuals were records; no full given a full homeless duty due to drug and alcohol issues. These were generally records held because the addiction had led to secondary complications of poor self-care or internally for mental health issues such as psychosis. Drug and alcohol issues however have been Strathclyde House or Buxton monitored over the review period; the following figures are taken from Supporting Road pre-2008 People outcomes in 2008 and 200945 where the service user has been housed in temporary accommodation. 46 Occupancy statistics Records show that the Buxton Road Centre has accommodated the most applicants recorded within the HNSS ‘Going with drug issues. Looking at this in the context of the numbers of single men Places’ bi-yearly accommodated within the 2008-09 financial year, the proportion of applicants stating newsletter to have drug issues is estimated as follows46:
Fig. 97 Number accommodated Drug indication % 108 29 27%
Levels of residents with alcohol issues were more consistent between the schemes, although at Strathclyde House alcohol problems were relatively prominent in the 2008/09 financial year:
Fig. 98 Number accommodated Alcohol indication % 85 21 25%
118 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 The figures should be taken as estimates as they are averages based on occupation levels, and do not take into account instances where residents have moved between schemes. However, they do show that a significant number of homeless applicants do present with additional support needs, regardless of whether they are in priority need.
Drug and alcohol indicators are also monitored for each interviewee by the Housing Options Team, but the numbers of these recorded were found to be low. This is usually due to applicants being concerned that disclosure will affect their rehousing prospects.
An additional difficulty many homeless people face is that drug or alcohol issues are not their only support need; many also experience physical or mental health issues. This has been acknowledged recently in the CLG and National Mental Health Development Unit ‘non-statutory guide for dealing with homeless populations experiencing complex trauma’. This guide recognises that there is a need for recognition and treatment of ‘dual diagnoses’; this is where the person has a mental health issue but also other complex needs, such as drug or alcohol issues, or trauma from earlier experiences. Currently there is little or no treatment available in Stockport for applicants with a dual diagnosis, which means some service users continue to be chaotic.
During consultation at the Temporary Accommodation Schemes, several applicants raised the issue that there was a perceived lack of support for people discharged to no fixed abode from detox and hospital stays. This is something which will need to be addressed within the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy to ensure that applicants with complex needs are supported to sustain their accommodation.
For consideration: Actively participate in, establish pathways and implement recommendations from the newly emerging alcohol ‘virtual team’
Mental and physical health
Health issues are intrinsically linked with homelessness, in ways such as a home becoming unfit for purpose due to disability, making it difficult to sustain employment and housing, and rendering people unable to manage their affairs. As detailed earlier in this review, the JSNA found health inequalities and concerns across Stockport including mental health, hypertension and obesity, and drug and alcohol related issues. There is a clear demand for services relating to these conditions; the JSNA for example cited that in one year over 8,300 visited the Health and Wellbeing Centre, and 2,280 accessed lower level wellbeing and mental health services.
The Housing Information Centre, Council offices, Stockport Direct Centres and all temporary accommodation schemes have been improved over time to make them as accessible as possible to those with disabilities. This includes physical access through
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 119 installing ramps, automatic doors, disabled toilets and lowered reception counters, and through providing hearing loops, disability awareness training and signing services on request.
Applicants rendered homeless due to serious physical disabilities are not common in Stockport; this is in part due to an effective adapted homes register, and through a responsive aids and adaptations service operated by Stockport Council’s Social Care teams. Additionally, both agencies have good working relationships with organisations such as Disability Stockport. However in each year of the review households have been found to be vulnerable primarily as a result of their physical health, which identifies a need for further analysis. This could be counteracted by targeting services in areas where those with physical health problems may be located or visit; for example GP surgeries, Stockport Advice Centres and hospitals. Fig. 99
Mental Health
15 Physical Health
10
5
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
As can be seen from the above chart, homeless acceptances from those vulnerable due to mental health issues have been more common over the review period. Although these have been brought down from a peak of 15 in 2006/07, six individuals with mental health needs severe enough to render them vulnerable were given a full homeless duty 2009/10.
The JSNA estimated that 54,900 (19%) adults suffered with mental health problems in Stockport, with 36,600 (13%) presenting directly to services. Mild anxiety and depression was the most common, amounting to 10% of the population at any given time.
The previous Homelessness Strategy stated it would implement recommendations from the Mental Health and Housing Strategy, which proposed four outcomes:
• Joint working protocols
120 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 • Performance Management • New service developments and needs analysis • Broader stakeholders’ involvement
Actions from these proposed outcomes have included developing a multi-agency protocol for preventing eviction amongst Stockport Homes’ tenants, implementing procedures to reduce accommodation risks for people with mental health needs, and successfully implementing the hospital discharge protocol. Actions around exploring potential new units of mental health accommodation and mapping / increasing provision are still being explored; the strategy will also be reviewed in 2011 with which the delivery of the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy will coincide.
In addition to being a key partner in the delivery of the Mental Health and Housing Strategy, the Special Needs Housing Officer continues to visit Stepping Hill’s psychiatric wards on a weekly basis and sits on a multi-agency mental health panel looking at suitable allocations for those with high level needs. During the lifetime of the previous strategy a Support Time and Recovery (STAR) Worker was recruited to assist residents in temporary accommodation schemes who had mental health issues, but this service was later withdrawn. There still appears to be a gap in provision, as many people who find themselves homeless continue to cite mental health issues as an on- going support need. Providing support for this is complicated by funding; as Stockport Homes’ Temporary Accommodation Schemes are funded by Supporting People, residents cannot usually access other services funded the same way whilst in there. And as mental health resources for low level issues are scarce or not targeted at these groups, many homeless applicants have unresolved issues which could lead to further tenancy and relationship breakdowns when they move on.
The aforementioned CLG and National Mental Health Development Unit guide for dealing with homeless populations experiencing complex trauma describes effective ways of meeting psychological and emotional needs. The guide argues that homelessness can be the result of a complex interaction between problems and trauma experienced individually and within society by vulnerable groups. It identifies attachment issues, emotion regulation and interpersonal skills are particular issues amongst homeless people. It also estimates that 55-60% of people in supported accommodation have a diagnosable personality disorder47. This supports further investigation and joint working between homelessness and mental health services.
For consideration: 47. CLG and • Deliver training to Housing Options and Temporary Accommodation staff on NMHDU, Meeting guidance for meeting psychological and emotional needs of people who are the psychological homeless and emotional • Secure commitment from public health authority for greater provision of mental needs of people who are health services, especially complex needs homeless, July 2010
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 121 Directly related to health issues is homelessness due to hospital discharge. Over the lifetime of the previous strategy several initiatives to prevent homelessness from hospitals were introduced. These included creating a new category of ‘bed blocking’ points within the allocations policy to help people bid for housing prior to leaving hospital, increasing outreach to more wards and participation in the development of a Greater Manchester hospital discharge protocol. Due to the proactive intervention of the Special Needs Housing Officer only one applicant has needed to be awarded bed blocking points since their introduction; the Officer has been effective in preventing homelessness and ensuring those who do become homeless are provided without appropriate accommodation and support. The discharge protocol was officially launched in April 2010 but is yet to be fully embedded; however Stockport Homes and the Council historically have a good relationship with the local Stepping Hill hospital.
The Special Needs Housing Officer visits Stepping Hill Hospital’s psychiatric wards on a weekly basis to give housing advice and, if necessary, take homelessness presentations. The advice will range from accessing and bidding on Homechoice to the Deposit Scheme, or addressing pre-existing housing problems such as family breakdowns or disrepair which may hinder them from returning home. In the 2009/10 financial year 41 people were provided with advice and assistance via this outreach; many of these people were seen on more than one occasion however, due to the long length of stay many patients have in these wards.
The chart below shows that numbers of applicants found to be in priority need becoming homeless from hospital discharge are low, demonstrating the effectiveness of both the discharge protocol and outreach work.
Fig. 100
4
3
2
1
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
122 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Non-priority homelessness due to hospital discharge however has shown a larger increase over the review period:
Fig. 101
10
8
6
4
2
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
The rise in non-priority hospital discharges is partly due to the more intensive work carried out by the Special Needs Housing Officer and Housing Options Outreach Worker in establishing links with Stepping Hill and ensuring patients are not released to no fixed abode. However it also demonstrates a need to carry forward promotional work of the hospital discharge protocol and raise NHS staff awareness about homelessness prevention measures.
There is scope for further work with other hospitals in the surrounding area in order to embed the hospital discharge protocol; for example Wythenshawe, Cheadle Royal and Manchester Royal. Despite Stepping Hill being the main source of referrals to the Housing Options Team, there are still instances where customers are admitted to hospitals elsewhere in Greater Manchester due to bed space or specialist treatment needs. More time and work therefore is needed to fully embed the Greater Manchester hospital discharge protocol.
For consideration: Implement recommendations of the working group and promote the Greater Manchester hospital discharge protocol.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 123 Joint working protocol: Community Mental Health Team
In 2007 Stockport Homes and the Community Mental Health Team agreed on a rehousing protocol whereby up to six cases each year could be allocated a withheld property outside of the regular Homechoice bidding system, giving these applicants an additional avenue for rehousing. The protocol also seeks to provide assistance to those requiring temporary accommodation, through joint working to reduce risk. This was developed acknowledging the particular difficulties faced by those with mental health problems in accessing and maintaining mainstream accommodation. All cases for consideration go through a Mental Health Panel, which is comprised of representatives from both services as well as other relevant support services.
Since 2007 the following numbers have been rehoused via this protocol:
Fig. 102 Financial Year Withheld accepted 2007/08 3 (Offerton North; Edgeley; Lancashire Hill) 2008/09 3 (Reddish – all) 2009/10 2 (Cheadle, Cheadle Heath)
More cases than those given a withheld will have been referred to panel, but not in all cases rehoused in this way; for example due to entering long term supported accommodation or declining a withheld offer. In practice, it has been found that the majority of cases have been able to secure their own accommodation using the Homechoice system.
The following tables show in more detail the current accommodation status of those housed via the joint working protocol:
Fig. 103 Financial Year 2007/08 Accommodation status 2010 Case 1 Still in accommodation Case 2 Evicted due to ASB, July 2009 Case 3 Deceased
Financial Year 2008/09 Accommodation status 2010 Case 1 Still in accommodation Case 2 Still in accommodation Case 3 Still in accommodation
Financial Year 2009/10 Accommodation status 2010 Case 1 Still in accommodation Case 2 Still in accommodation
124 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Individuals rehoused via the protocol are those with higher level mental health issues whilst not thought to need a residential worker, and so require on-going support and monitoring; this is why the last strategy introduced a further protocol for reducing evictions amongst Stockport Homes’ tenants with mental health issues. Unfortunately this was not in place when the one tenant from 2007 was evicted; however it can and will be referred to in future instances.
What is evident from these cases is that there is some under-utilisation of the joint working protocol, as the maximum allocation of six cases has not been used in any of the three years. However this could be attributed to individuals bidding successfully via Homechoice, and effective housing options and homelessness prevention advice. It is important however that this protocol and allocation quota remains to ensure there is an effective safety net and rehousing option for this vulnerable group.
Joint Working Protocol: Learning Disability Team
As with the Community Mental Health Team, Stockport Homes also has a joint working protocol including a number of allocations with the Learning Disability Team at Social Care. This is again in recognition of the fact that this group also faces increased difficulties in accessing and maintaining mainstream accommodation and offers an additional opportunity for this group in terms of rehousing.
Since 2007 the following numbers have been rehoused via this protocol:
Fig. 104 Financial Year Withheld accepted 2007/08 2 (Cheadle – both) 2008/09 3 (Offerton x2; Edgeley) 2009/10 1 (Cheadle Heath)
Again, other cases were recommended for a withheld offer but did not take this, either due to requiring supported accommodation or having some other change in circumstance.
The following tables show in more detail the current accommodation status of those housed via the joint working protocol:
Fig. 105 Financial Year 2007/08 Accommodation status 2010 Case 1 Still in accommodation Case 2 Terminated due to custody
Financial Year 2008/09 Accommodation status 2010 Case 1 Still in accommodation Case 2 Still in accommodation Case 3 Deceased
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 125 Despite two tenancies which have ended due to one tenant being deceased and one being taken into custody, the outcomes of this protocol have been positive. Individuals rehoused in conjunction with the Learning Disability Team have been able to sustain their tenancies, which is positive evidence for retaining this allocation in forthcoming years.
Wards
Stockport has a population of over 284,000 spread across 21 wards. Despite this spread, there are clearly identifiable trends in where homeless households have presented from in the review period.
The table below shows where households found to be unintentionally homeless and priority need have most frequently originated from:
Fig. 106
60 Brinnington and Central Out of the Borough 50 Offerton 40 Edgeley & Cheadle Heath 30 Heatons North 20 Davenport & Cale Green 10
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
Brinnington and Central is clearly identifiable as the main source of priority homeless applications throughout the review period, except for 2009/10. Brinnington is an area which does have pockets of deep deprivation; this will be explored further in the next section of this review on priority one renewal areas. Despite applications from Brinnington being consistently high, those from people outside of the borough have crept up over the review period to become the largest point of referral in the last year. This is due in part to increased homelessness due to domestic or other violence as explored previously, as this can result in some households needing to present themselves as homeless outside of their existing authority. Additionally, preventative work in Stockport is achieving results but does not reach outside the Borough in the same way.
Offerton, Edgeley and Cheadle Heath, the Heatons North and Davenport and Cale Green have also seen relatively high numbers of priority homeless acceptances
126 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 throughout the review period in comparison with other wards. These wards also fall within priority renewal areas, and therefore have a diverse range of issues which need addressing via a multi-agency approach.
There were some unusual patterns throughout the review period where high instances of homeless acceptances came from certain wards. For example, 11 cases came from Cheadle and Gatley in 2006/07 and 6 in 2009/10. This ward is not known for being deprived or experiencing particular social issues; however these instances could be explained by the relative lack of affordable housing in this ward.
Looking at non priority cases, Brinnington and Central and Out of Borough applicants were again the most common:
Fig. 107
20 Brinnington and Central Out of the Borough 15 Offerton Edgeley & Cheadle Heath 10 Reddish North
5 Bredbury & Woodley
0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
Less common amongst non-priority applicants were those from the other priority one ward, Davenport and Cale Green (Adswood and Bridgehall). However this area does include part of Edgeley and Cheadle Heath, which did feature relatively highly. Edgeley and Cheadle Heath is an area with a particularly large private sector, which may also explain why it is a high source of homeless applications. Heatons North also featured relatively highly in two years (6 in 2007/08 and 13 in 2008/09), which forms part of the Brinnington and Town Centre priority one renewal area.
In general wards from which non priority applicants presented showed less of a clear pattern than priority need applicants other than the main four of Brinnington and Central, out of Borough, Offerton and Edgeley and Cheadle Heath. There were some similar unusual patterns to priority need applicants; for example five non-priority applicants coming from Cheadle Hulme North and five from Cheadle Hulme South in 2006/07, but this could be explained similarly by high property prices in these wards.
Certain wards also identified not only concentrations of homelessness, but
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 127 concentrations of young people who are NEET – not in employment, education or training. The highest levels were in the Priority One wards again: Brinnington and Central (22.4%) and Davenport and Cale Green (14.6%)48. Homelessness and unemployment can be viewed as having an equally detrimental effect on one another, and require solutions whereby they can be addressed together.
The trends identified in four wards warrant further investigation in the forthcoming homelessness strategy.
For consideration: • Increase promotion of Housing Options services in wards with high levels of homelessness: Brinnington, Offerton, Bridgehall, town centre – for example, via Stockport Direct centres. • Implement recommendations of and increase partnership with priority one regeneration groups for example, Brinnington board.
Safer and stronger communities (P1 areas)
All of the above factors around unemployment, health, debt and crime are an especially large source of concern in certain parts of the borough. Priority One neighbourhood renewal areas have been identified as Adswood and Bridgehall, Brinnington, Lancashire Hill and Heaton Norris, and the town centre. Key issues can be identified within each of these areas:
• High levels of residents reporting to be in ‘not good health’; 15.8% in the Brinnington and Central ward and 10.8% in Davenport and Cale Green, which included Adswood and Bridgehall. • Economic inactivity ranges from 19-30% across these areas, as opposed to just 16% in Stockport on average. • Unemployment is higher than the Borough average; over three times in Brinnington in particular. • 176 domestic violence incidents occurred in Brinnington and Central in 2009; a rate of 13.77 per 1000 people, compared to 3.43 across Stockport. • 14-15% of households in these areas are headed by single parents. • Educational attainment is well below the Borough average (57%), with only between 27-37% of pupils achieving five grade A*-C GCSEs. 48. Information provided by • The highest proportions of ‘NEET’ young people are concentrated in P1 areas, Connexions including Brinnington (22.4%) and Davenport and Cale Green (14.6%). Overall, 8% Stockport, 2008 of Stockport’s 16-18 year olds are NEET. • There were 572 alcohol related hospital admissions from these areas in 2007/08; 49. Data supplied nearly twice the Borough average. by Kay Winter, Brinnington • Over 70% of residents in the Brinnington and Central ward perceive drug users and Neighbourhood dealers to be a particular problem in the area49 Management project team Additionally the Priority One areas have the highest concentrations of social
128 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 housing; therefore they are areas in which homeless households have historically been rehoused. In the Brinnington and Central ward 53.9% of households are social housing tenants, with Davenport and Cale Green having the second highest concentration of 23.8%.
Homelessness in these wards / priority one areas was detailed in the previous section, and the Brinnington and Central ward was shown to be the highest source of both full duty acceptances and non-priority homelessness. Also detailed previously were high levels of NEET young people, which combined with the other social and economic issues listed above, could exacerbate homelessness amongst this age group. Additionally there is a concern that current age restrictions on social housing are continuing to concentrate people into priority one areas, including homeless applicants. This is something that needs to be considered by the Council through the Allocations Policy Review, and within Stockport Homes’ Proposed Stock Maximisation Strategy.
For consideration: • Implement more skills and education courses at Temporary Accommodation Schemes. • Support and implement recommendations from the age restrictions review. • Support and implement recommendations from the stock maximisation strategy to address pressures on social housing.
Joint working: Stockport Homes Housing Management
Neighbourhood Housing Officers from Stockport Homes’ Housing Management (Area Teams) undertake joint working with the Housing Options Team when tenants claim to be threatened with homelessness or are experiencing other issues requiring housing advice. In every instance attempts should be made to resolve issues first by the Area Team; however where a tenant claims to not be able to return to their property joint working with the Housing Options Team is undertaken.
Instances where a tenant and their Neighbourhood Housing Officer would approach the Housing Options Team for assistance would usually involve their home not being reasonable to occupy in some way; for example, fear of violence. The Housing Options Team may also be asked to intervene when the tenant is at threat of eviction, for example through ASB or rent arrears. In all cases where a tenant is threatened with homelessness the Area Team should notify the Housing Options Team as soon as possible so that preventative measures can be considered.
In recent years considerable preventative work has achieved on-going reductions in homelessness acceptances. Within this setting 31 interviews were arranged via the joint working protocol in the 2009/10 financial year; this number is likely to have been greater however due to instances of tenants presenting directly to the Housing Options Team without notifying their area housing office. More effective measuring systems,
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 129 such as indicators placed on the Northgate system, need to be investigated to ensure accurate records are kept. The most common reasons for joint assessments were:
Fig. 108
Harassment / Threats Domestic Violence Arrears ASB Succession Relationship breakdown Racial abuse
Of the 31 interviews recorded, five led to a full homeless acceptance, and three of those five tenants were moved into temporary accommodation. Two were due to domestic violence, two from harassment or threatened violence, and one due to not being able to succeed a tenancy they were currently occupying. Another five led to the tenant being rehoused via Special Housing Panel, with none of these going into temporary accommodation. Two were due to domestic violence, one harassment, one racial abuse and one regarding inability to succeed a tenancy.
Stockport Homes has procedures for dealing with ASB; domestic violence; relationship breakdown; racial abuse / hate crimes; and neighbour disputes. These have mainly been drawn up by the Anti-Social Behaviour Team, which sits within the Housing Management Team. The procedures are designed to prevent tenants having to leave their homes, and in extreme circumstances referrals can be made to Special Housing Panel which is able to consider rehousing as a role of the Allocations Policy. The Domestic Abuse procedure and the Hate Crime procedure refer to the tenant being able to request a move, either via Social Need points on Homechoice, or an allocation through Special Housing Panel50. This is with the proviso that there is sufficient evidence to justify the move within the Allocations Policy. There is a concern therefore as to whether these procedures are being fully utilised, or whether tenants are being directed towards the Housing Options Team in an attempt to respond quickly to urgent housing situations.
50. Stockport The major issue drawn from this analysis is that responses to tenant issues are not Homes Hate Crimes Policy always consistent, and there is some confusion over when a household should be and Procedure, assisted via these procedures and Special Housing Panel, and when they should revised April 2009 present as homeless. This inconsistency may be due to individual nuances with
130 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 the cases; also, leaving their home due to violence does trigger a homelessness investigation.
Evidently having to enter the homelessness process has a detrimental effect on tenants, as well as increasing homelessness acceptances and putting pressure on performance against the National Indicator 156. In consultation undertaken with customers this was raised on more than one occasion as being a negative aspect of the service; tenants did not understand why they were being made homeless from one tenancy, only to be offered another one after several weeks in temporary accommodation. There are also associated costs to the public purse and the tenants involved: these include rent arrears due to limitations on awards of dual Housing Benefit; the cost of storing furniture, belongings and pets; and other costs which may be incurred through securing and undertaking void work on empty properties. Crisis estimate the cost of a failed tenancy and subsequent homelessness to be £1,600 to £4,210; the Chartered Institute of Housing place it higher, at £4,000-£10,50051.
A problem could be that there are several procedures, but no overall protocol for how the Housing Management and Housing Options Team will work together, which could be an area for development in the forthcoming strategy.
For consideration: • Clarify and agree joint working protocol with Stockport Homes and RSL Housing Management to ensure consistency in dealing with tenants needing to move. • Investigate priority and procedure within the allocations policy to enable tenants with a genuine need to move.
Move on Strategy / Move on Plans Protocol
A Stockport Move on Strategy was produced by Strategic Housing in 2009 under the auspices of Stockport Homelessness Forum to assess gaps and housing need for those leaving Supporting People funded accommodation, including the Council’s temporary accommodation managed by Stockport Homes. The strategy describes ‘move on’ as follows:
“Move-on is the process of securing more appropriate and more settled accommodation for people. Particularly those people who are currently housed in a range of short term and temporary accommodation in the Borough and who are receiving some level of support. Such accommodation includes the homelessness hostels, supported lodgings for care leavers, and specialist services for people recovering from alcohol or drug misuse. 51. Crisis, 2003; CIH, 2006 This accommodation is provided by a range of providers including the
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 131 Local Authority, Housing Associations, Charities and the Private Sector.
Move on involves securing housing that is appropriate for each individual at the time that they are ready to leave their current short-term housing. For most people appropriate would be a one bed room flat. For some there would also be some level of floating support”52
The Move on Strategy analysed where applicants from these types of accommodation were rehoused to, and to what kind of landlord or tenure. It found that of the 368 moving on, 68% move in to social housing, and for 94% of this group this was council / Stockport Homes’ accommodation. As Stockport Homes manages 73% of social housing in the area, the numbers rehoused by it rather than RSLs can be seen as disproportionate. The numbers housed by the private sector are also very low; private rented housing makes up over 50% of the housing market in Stockport, but only 26 people were move on into this out of 368 in the last year.
The Move on Strategy makes recommendations from the imbalance of where clients are rehoused, some of which will be considered for implementation in conjunction with the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy.
For consideration: • Encourage RSLs to agree to fixed proportionate quota of move-on nominations. • Establish a supported lodgings type scheme for adults for example, for those requiring a shared house environment rather than independent tenancies. • Expand the provision of detox / abstinence based services, for example, setting aside flats in temporary accommodation.
Registered Social Landlords and Housing Associations
Actions around RSLs were set by the previous Homelessness Strategy, and to some degree have been met. For example, half of the main six RSLs in Stockport have agreed to joint working protocols with the Housing Options Team and so provide early warnings about tenants at risk of eviction. Some actions remain outstanding such as engaging RSLs with accommodating more Priority Prolific Offenders. There has also been limited progress on increasing the proportion of nominations given to those leaving supported accommodation or to homeless applicants, as recommended by the Move on Strategy / Move on Plans Protocol. A significant issue remains whereby some RSLs are reluctant to return data on the outcomes of nominations, leading to accusations of ‘cherry picking’ and avoiding potential tenants with higher needs.
Data on allocations from 2009/10 identified 161 lettings from RSLs through 52. SMBC, Homechoice’s Choice Based Lettings system. Of these, nine were to homeless Stockport Move applicants; this amounted to 5.6% of all RSL allocations, which is similar to the figure on Strategy, 2009 identified by the Move on Strategy. This is in contrast to 16.6% of all Stockport Council
132 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 / Stockport Homes lettings being allocated to homeless applicants. Six of the RSL lettings were to households in priority need, and three were to non-priority applicants.
The low number of homeless applicants housed by RSLs can be partly explained by a lack of larger family accommodation let by them through Homechoice; in 2009/10 only 10 out of the 161 properties were three bedroom houses. It should also be noted that due to the nature of the Choice Based Lettings system which most homeless applicants use to obtain accommodation, it may be the case that they are simply not placing bids for RSL properties. However, when a homeless household is made a final offer of accommodation upon having had their homeless duty for eight weeks, it is rare that this is of an RSL property. Further development is therefore needed in this area to ensure that a realistic and fair proportion of homeless applicants are housed by RSLs, in order to ensure a broad scope of rehousing areas and landlords.
For consideration: • Increase the number of nominations offered to Homechoice via the Allocations Review / other networking arrangements. • Housing Strategy to ensure all RSLs provide full and timely data on nominations.
Affordable housing
The previous Homelessness Strategy sought to support and maximise the supply of affordable housing in the borough, and this was achieved both by RSLs and Stockport Homes itself on three separate sites. The Council achieved and exceeded its NI155 (number of affordable homes delivered) target over a three year period, which does not end until 2011. Additionally it successfully bid for AGMA funding prior to changes in government, which will be utilised to build more units of accommodation.
However, although any house building will increase supply and help with overall housing pressures, the supply of affordable homes to rent has been small in comparison to those built for affordable ownership or shared equity options, which many customers facing homelessness are priced out of. Shelter estimate that the average income needed to access intermediate or shared ownership is £28-32,000 per annum. They also advise that less than only one per cent of the population are living in tenures such as these53. In the North West £50,266 was allocated per unit to building social rented housing; but £41,256 was granted per unit from the HCA to 53. Shelter, affordable home ownership schemes despite less than one per cent of the population 54 The Forgotten choosing this tenure . Households, July 2010 Given current challenging economic times, it seems more appropriate for this forthcoming strategy to focus on more immediate housing needs rather than seeking 54. HCA Regional Investment to boost affordable home ownership. Evidently funding to build new homes for rent Statements, April is limited; therefore making better use of existing stock may be the most productive 2010 focus for the early years of the strategy.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 133 The attractiveness and affordability of the private sector increased greatly during the time of the previous homelessness strategy, partly due to generous rates of Local Housing Allowance. With the help of the landlord’s forums and the Stockport Homes Deposit Scheme, more landlords were willing to let to tenants in receipt of benefits than in previous years. However, there are risks to this continuing due to reductions in Local Housing Allowance and other welfare benefits, and also the continued risk of repossession in the buy to let market. These will both reduce the amount of stock that is affordable within Housing Benefit limits, and also serves to discourage landlords from letting to those claiming welfare benefits due to the potential of securing higher rental income in the open market. The DWP estimate that there will be a nationwide reduction in available private rented sector accommodation accepting Housing Benefit, which in Stockport could fall from 54% to 37%55.
The government have announced recent commitments to enabling local authorities to build more affordable housing; Stockport Homes itself has begun work on two new build sites, and has plans for one more. One way in which they plan to encourage councils to build is a ‘New Homes Bonus Scheme’; under this the government has said it will match the council tax raised for each new house they build for six years56. Additionally there has been an announcement of a government pledge to provide funds to bring empty properties back into use, of which further details are awaited.
For consideration: • Increase the supply of affordable housing for purchase and rent. • Form and review strategic links to empty homes strategies. • Develop links and implement recommendations from the maximising stock strategy, and replicate these throughout other sectors – for example, in partnership with RSLs to tackle under-occupation.
Risks
The previous Homelessness Strategy enjoyed great successes, thanks in part to a strong economy and concerted efforts to access to various sources of funding and support. Consequently homelessness has been greatly reduced, prevention increased and an enhanced housing options approach developed. Looking forward to 2011 however, it is unlikely that the new strategy will be operational in a similar environment and so not enjoy the same opportunities.
55. DWP, Impact The risks already outlined in this review include: of Housing Benefit proposals, July 2010 • economic prospects; • benefit reforms; 56. Accessed • housing market prospects; via http://www. • containing repossessions; communities. gov.uk/news/ • housing supply; and housing/1681485 • public expenditure.
134 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 The Council and services provided on its behalf by Stockport Homes face particular problems due to the nature of the funding streams which they currently depend upon. The Housing Options Team receives a management fee from the Council to undertake its arms lengths services; however as with any other local authority, Stockport Council is having to consider where it can make efficiency savings and any service, including homelessness, could be vulnerable. Aside from this fee, the service also receives funding from the Homelessness Grant from central government which helps to fund two workers, focussed on service development and outreach. This also could be reduced, which would leave more limited potential for the service to implement new developments. There are also other smaller amounts of money directed towards the service from Supporting People and Probation, which fund the Housing Support Point Officer and Housing Options Officer for Offenders. Funding has been secured until October 2011 of the Housing Support Point service, and at the time of writing no decision has been made regarding further Probation funding for the link officer, who has achieved such success in rehousing offenders.
Within temporary accommodation, the service is funded also through several streams, including rents (generally monies recuperated from Housing Benefit), and Supporting People. The ring fence around Supporting People monies and subsequently other named grants have been removed, meaning that funding is no longer protected or designated towards particular services; although the Council has stated its commitment to these services. In addition this service is also vulnerable to budget cuts, which could be passed on to temporary accommodation. More generally there are also changes being made to the Housing Revenue account, which Stockport Homes and Council will need to accommodate in the lifetime of the forthcoming Homelessness Strategy.
There are strong arguments for the cost effectiveness of homelessness prevention, and therefore the continued funding of services. A recent report57 highlighted just some of the longer term financial benefits of homelessness prevention tools:
• The costs per person of successful mediation are estimated at £600, around nine times less expensive than providing alternate settled accommodation. These savings are based on the running costs of £30,000 per annum for an external service – in Stockport over the review period 1193 people were successfully mediated home; this demonstrates a vast saving
• The costs of home visits are estimated to be 3.5 times less expensive than providing alternate settled accommodation. This based on the running costs of around £15,000 per annum, assuming 50% of a case officers’ time – in Stockport 57. Neil Moreland, a dedicated Housing Options Outreach Worker has been funded through the ‘Demonstrating Homelessness Grant since 2007. If this worker was lost or capacity for other the Cost officers to undertake visits reduced, this could result in rising costs for the service Effectiveness of Preventing Homelessness’, • Advice on housing options (for example, resolving Housing Benefit problems, rent July 2010 or service charge arrears, negotiation / legal advocacy) is estimated at around nine
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 135 times less expensive than providing alternate settled accommodation – As detailed previously in this review the Housing Options Team interviewed 5,308 people over the four year period. 1,233 were found to be homeless (priority need, non priority and intentional cases all considered); this means 4,075 were assisted with advice on housing options, although it is acknowledged that not all were threatened with homelessness
• The cost of operating a rent bond scheme is 37 times less the average cost of providing accommodation under the main homelessness duty. This based on the assumption that the average claim rate of bonds at 10% per annum – in the last year only 4.38% of claims were made; although this was higher throughout the review period, it clearly demonstrates its ongoing cost effectiveness
Furthermore, the report highlights risks that could be incurred if homelessness funding was to be cut:
• Corporate – cutting funding for preventing homelessness can generate negative publicity and could portray the Council as an organisation that doesn’t care about vulnerable and marginalised people. A reduction in funding will affect the ability to achieve homelessness targets; this could result in an increase in homelessness levels.
• Economic – preventing homelessness saves money when compared to the cost of providing temporary accommodation and re-housing into alternative accommodation. Cutting funding for preventing homeless might achieve short- term savings but could cost the public purse a considerable greater amount in the medium / long-term.
• Social - Other public services could see increased pressures on their services and budgets. Economic, housing, health, crime and violence are all causes of homeless, services associated to these factors are likely to see additional numbers of people coming in to contact with them
• Environmental - There will be an increase in the number of people sleeping on the streets. Other street activities such as begging, drinking, and prostitution are also likely to increase. All of which is undesirable in city and town centres and potentially off-putting to people thinking of visiting and/or businesses intending invest in the area.
• Legal - Local authorities have a duty under Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 to prevent homelessness. Reduction in funding could have a detrimental impact on the local authority to satisfactorily fulfil this duty. A reduction in funding for tools to prevent homeless will result in an increased number of people being owed the full housing duty.
136 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 All of this needs to be taken into account whilst considering the evidence earlier in this review that some applicants do have complex needs, and returning them to their original housing situation does not address underlying issues. Therefore there is still an ongoing need for the support, partnership working and ultimately accommodation that the homelessness service in Stockport provides.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 137 7. Equality Impact Assessment
An Equality Impact Assessment has been produced following consultation with customers, and the identification of data and trends within this review. This sets outs the aims and goals of the two pieces of work, details who is intended to benefit from their formation and discusses ways of counteracting any adverse impact. The EIA found that although there was no adverse impact on any particular groups, there was a differential impact on some due to the way homelessness legislation is set out. This includes there being a higher proportion of female applicants (due to dependant children or pregnancy), and younger applicants such as 16-17 year olds.
The EIA did make recommendations which will be carried forward by the Homelessness Strategy; these include:
• Undertaking research into diversity monitoring for homelessness and housing options (for example, regarding lack of responses and representation around sexuality), and promote accessibility of services
• Undertaking research into ward origin for BME applicants to see if alternative targeting is needed
138 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 8. Forming the Homlessness Strategy
The findings and ‘considerations’ noted in this review will go on to form the action plan within the new homelessness strategy. This will specify what actions will be delivered by the Council and Stockport Homes, and will incorporate a range of partner agencies with which the Council will agree their own responsibilities.
As already detailed, the new strategy is planned to run for five years due to current uncertainties over funding and the political climate following the May general election. However, there is scope for initiating a review and re-adjusting priorities sooner if this is felt to be appropriate and achievable.
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 139 9. List of key tables and figures
1. Government homelessness documents (p9) 2. National Indicators relating to homelessness services (p9) 3. National homelessness acceptances (p12) 4. Regional homelessness acceptances (p12) 5. Greater Manchester homelessness acceptances (p13-16) 6. As above 7. As above 8. As above 9. Stockport homelessness acceptances and prevention (p16) 10. Customer consultation: issues relating to homelessness (p31) 11. Stakeholder consultation: issues relating to homelessness (p33) 12. Stakeholder consultation: secondary needs (p35) 13. 2007-10 Strategy achievements (p38-9) 14. Partnership working (p40-1) 15. Number of housing options interviews (p42) 16. Mediation (p43-4) 17. As above 18. Deposit Scheme (p44-5) 19. As above 20. As above 21. Housing Support Points (p47-8) 22. As above 23. Employment Support Officer outcomes (p50) 24. Help for homeowners (p51-2) 25. As above 26. Referrals to other services (p52) 27. Out of hours service (p54-5) 28. As above 29. Wellspring outreach (p56) 30. Causes of homelessness: local and national comparisons (p57-9) 31. As above 32. As above 33. As above 34. As above 35. As above 36. As above 37. Priority need: local and national comparisons (p60) 38. As above 39. National Indicator 156 (p62) 40. Domestic abuse (p64) 41. Parents no longer willing/able to accommodate (p66) 42. Other friends/relatives no longer willing/able to accommodate (p68) 43. Termination of assured shorthold tenancy (p69) 44. Loss of NASS accommodation (p71) 45. Non-Priority homelessness (p72-3) 46. As above
140 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 47. Intentional homelessness (p74-5) 48. As above 49. As above 50. BME homelessness (p77-9) 51. As above 52. As above 53. As above 54. As above 55. Disability (p80-2) 56. As above 57. As above 58. As above 59. As above 60. Gender (p82) 61. As above 62. As above 63. Sexuality (p84) 64. Religion (p84-5) 65. As above 66. Age (p85-6) 67. As above 68. As above 69. Youth homelessness (p87-90) 70. As above 71. As above 72. As above 73. As above 74. As above 75. 16/17 year olds (p91) 76. Looked after children (p93-7) 77. As above 78. As above 79. As above 80. As above 81. As above 82. As above 83. Eligibility / EU nationals (p99) 84. Rough sleeping (p100-2) 85. As above 86. As above 87. As above 88. Local Housing Allowance reforms (p104-5) 89. As above 90. As above 91. As above 92. Repossessions (p109)
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 141 93. Rent arrears (p110-2) 94. Prison discharges (p113) 95. Anti-Social Behaviour (p116-7) 96. As above 97. Drugs and alcohol (p118) 98. As above 99. Homeless with mental / physical health problems (p120) 100. Hospital discharges (p122-3) 101. As above 102. Community Mental Health allocations (p124) 103. As above 104. Learning Disability allocations (p125) 105. As above 106. Wards (p126-7) 107. As above 108. Joint assessments with SHL Housing Management (p130)
142 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 10. Glossary of terms and abbreviations
ADS Addiction Dependency Solutions AGMA Association of Greater Manchester Authorities ASB Anti-Social Behaviour BME Black and Minority Ethnic BVPI Best Value Performance Indicator CAB Citizens Advice Bureau Case Law Court cases offering interpretation / clarification of housing law CAT Community Alcohol Team CBL Choice Based Lettings CDT Community Drugs Team CMHT Community Mental Health Team DAS Stockport Drug and Alcohol Services (part of SSP) DAT Drug Action Team DCSF Department for Children, Schools and Families EIA Equalities Impact Assessment EU European Union – usually referring to workers and/or state members who may/ may not be eligible for homelessness assistance Floating support Support workers allocation to households wherever they live HOT Housing Options Team JSNA Joint Strategic Needs Assessment LAA Local Area Agreement LAC Looked After Children (care leavers) LSP Local Strategic Partnership MARAC Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference (domestic abuse) MOSAIC Young people’s (25 and under) drug and alcohol services NEET Not in Employment, Education or Training NI(number) National performance indicators Non-Priority Where a homeless household is not deemed to be vulnerable PCT Primary Care Trust (health body)
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 143 Priority need Homelessness legislation category where a household is deemed to be vulnerable / duty to rehouse PPO Priority Prolific Offenders RRB Reducing Re-offending Board RSLs Registered Social Landlords (Housing Associations) SCAIN Stockport Community Advice and Information Network SHF Stockport Homelessness Forum SSP Safer Stockport Partnership STAR Worker Support Time And Recovery Worker Stockport Advice The Council’s advice and information service, comprising of Stockport Direct advice centres; Welfare Rights; and Debt Advice Strategic Housing Strategic team within Council Supporting People Supporting People – commissioning and funding body for housing related support services SWA Stockport Women’s Aid TA Temporary Accommodation (Brindale House, Buxton Road, Strathclyde House) VOA Valuation Office Agency Worklessness Term used to describe economically inactive people not in or seeking employment, education or training YOT Youth Offending Team
144 Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 Accessing our services
This document gives information about the homeless review 2010. A free interpreting service is available of you need help with this document. Please telephone Stockport Interpreting Unit on 0161 477 9000. Email [email protected]
You can get a copy of this document from Stockport Homes on audiotape or CD, or in large print free of charge. For more information please contact Phil Rhodes on 0161 474 2860, text 07891 949 399 or email [email protected]
Portuguese
Farsi
Chinese
Urdu
Arabic
Polish
Stockport Homelessness Review 2010 145