Written submissions received for the London Assembly’s Housing Committee investigation into Sheltered Housing Ref Organisation Position/Title Sub-001 Central and Cecil Housing Trust Caroline Tiller – Chief Executive Sub-002 Chislehurst & Sidcup Housing Kym Regan- Business Support Manager Association Sub-003 Brockley Tenants’ Jeremy Hopkin - Manager Co-operative Ltd. Sub-004 LB Greenwich Gill Ackrill - Head of Strategy & Partnerships Housing Sub-005 Housing Learning and Jeremy Porteus - Director Improvement Network Sub-006 LB Sutton Simon Latham – Executive Head of Community Living Sub-007 Caroline Mitcham - Business Development Catalyst Housing Ltd Manager Sub-008 Chartered Institute of Housing Sarah Davis - CIH, Senior Policy and Practice Officer Sub-009 Abbeyfield Susan O'Brien-Coker, Development Manager Sub-010 Wandsworth LB Chris Jones - Head of Housing Strategy and Development Sub-011 International Longevity Centre Matt Hawkins - Policy and Public Affairs UK Assistant Sub-012 CDS Co-operatives Jon Stevens Sub-013 Age UK Gordon Deuchars – Policy and Campaigns Manager Sub-014 National Housing Federation Michelle Smith - London Lead Manager Central and Cecil Housing Trust Email received 4 June 2013 Dear Paul, Further to your e mail below. I hope that the following information will assist you with your work. C&C stock total is 2293 Of this 1403 is classed as housing for older people; 382 are bed spaces in our care homes and 267 are supported housing - (the remaining 241 are classed as general needs but were originally in receipt od SP funding which has been withdrawn so whilst classed as GN has some quite vulnerable residents). 1398 older people units are self contained, 5 are not. The average age profile of most of our stock is between the 60’s and 80’s and so some of it is quite outdated. Minimum Decent Homes standards have been applied. Much of our accommodation is bedsit/studio accommodation and is located in very prime areas of London e.g. St Johns Wood, Primrose Hill etc and as such it appears that location takes precedence over size of accommodation in a lot of cases. However we do have some very long term voids and in some areas eg Camden we do have difficulty letting bedsits due to the fact that Camden have quite a reasonable stock of one bed properties and these tend to be chosen over bedsits. C&C have committed in its new Business Plan ,to provide accommodation and services for people over 55 and in the London area. We are therefore looking to provide more accommodation for older people and plan to do so by disposing of some stock that no longer meets our business criteria (having completed an Asset Review)to allow us to fund both new build and refurbishments. New build is likely to be on land that we already have property on but which no longer is fit for purpose. It is definite that we will need to service new loans to pay for some of the work that we undertake. Likewise we are in the process of reviewing how we deliver services and are doing this through our “Chosen by Us” work with residents. This is at a very early stage but is about ensuring that residents of our schemes have a more tailored approach to their scheme service rather than one size fits all. In our discussions with residents it is clear that many do nor like the “badge” of “sheltered or supported housing” and are not that keen on” housing for older people” as they believe that this potentially highlights vulnerability. This is an area we are going to explore more in due course. Our Business Plan 2013/16 sets out very clearly how we intend to manage stock and deliver services and is available for anyone to review. We have a reasonable relationship with London LAs. The two key LAs where we have most stock are keen to work with us and we meet regularly with them both regarding development and service provision. As is always the case though the process can be time consuming. The key challenge for the future will be funding both for works to properties and new build and for delivering new and improved services that meet the needs of a very different older population who have much higher expectations and where quite a few want to get involved in the decision making. On the one hand this is an excellent opportunity to make changes and get things right but also offers up difficulties due to resourcing . The Mayor could enable more funding to refurbish existing properties and lobby Government to reduce VAT on such works. Many older people want to maintain their independence as long as possible and so they do need more support going into their home. The move to SP funding and the division of HB/SP did create more than just a division whereby RP staff were having to separate out the functions and account for them .This created a wealth of confusion for residents and indeed staff and added to this the fact that now individual schemes have a variety of carers providing a service for individual residents , the situation is even more confusing. In some of the C&C schemes there can be up to 20 different carers from different companies coming and going within the scheme. C&C residents have asked us to explore the possibility of C&C establishing some form of service that could undertake this work. In view of this it is possible that the Mayor could review how this is undertaken within London as it is so important to residents and impacts considerably. Should you have any questions regarding this response please do contact me. Yours faithfully, Caroline Caroline Tiller Chief Executive Central & Cecil Central Office Dear Paul, Further to your e mail below. I hope that the following information will assist you with your work. C&C stock total is 2293 Of this 1403 is classed as housing for older people; 382 are bed spaces in our care homes and 267 are supported housing.(the remaining 241 are classed as general needs but were originally in receipt od SP funding which has been withdrawn so whilst classed as GN has some quite vulnerable residents) 1398 older people units are self contained, 5 are not The average age profile of most of our stock is between the 60’s and 80’s and so some of it is quite outdated. Minimum Decent Homes standards have been applied. Much of our accommodation is bedsit/studio accommodation and is located in very prime areas of London e.g. St Johns Wood, Primrose Hill etc and as such it appears that location takes precedence over size of accommodation in a lot of cases. However we do have some very long term voids and in some areas eg Camden we do have difficulty letting bedsits due to the fact that Camden have quite a reasonable stock of one bed properties and these tend to be chosen over bedsits. C&C have committed in its new Business Plan ,to provide accommodation and services for people over 55 and in the London area. We are therefore looking to provide more accommodation for older people and plan to do so by disposing of some stock that no longer meets our business criteria (having completed an Asset Review)to allow us to fund both new build and refurbishments. New build is likely to be on land that we already have property on but which no longer is fit for purpose. It is definite that we will need to service new loans to pay for some of the work that we undertake. Likewise we are in the process of reviewing how we deliver services and are doing this through our “Chosen by Us” work with residents. This is at a very early stage but is about ensuring that residents of our schemes have a more tailored approach to their scheme service rather than one size fits all. In our discussions with residents it is clear that many do nor like the “badge” of “sheltered or supported housing” and are not that keen on” housing for older people” as they believe that this potentially highlights vulnerability. This is an area we are going to explore more in due course Our Business Plan 2013/16 sets out very clearly how we intend to manage stock and deliver services and is available for anyone to review. We have a reasonable relationship with London LAs. The two key LAs where we have most stock are keen to work with us and we meet regularly with them both regarding development and service provision. As is always the case though the process can be time consuming. The key challenge for the future will be funding both for works to properties and new build and for delivering new and improved services that meet the needs of a very different older population who have much higher expectations and where quite a few want to get involved in the decision making. On the one hand this is an excellent opportunity to make changes and get things right but also offers up difficulties due to resourcing . The Mayor could enable more funding to refurbish existing properties and lobby Government to reduce VAT on such works. Many older people want to maintain their independence as long as possible and so they do need more support going into their home. The move to SP funding and the division of HB/SP did create more than just a division whereby RP staff were having to separate out the functions and account for them .This created a wealth of confusion for residents and indeed staff and added to this the fact that now individual schemes have a variety of carers providing a service for individual residents , the situation is even more confusing.