Presented by Phil Holmes, DASS, Sheffield City Council

1. Foundations -
DFG Champions roadshow
Phil Holmes
DASS, Sheffield City Council

2. Background
• Consensus that the link between the
BCF and DFGs gives welcome
recognition to the connectivity
between health, housing and social
care
• Considerable debate between county
and district councils as to how DFG
funding should be allocated and
invested
• DFGs sit at the pivot between housing
and social care and health.

3. Challenges
• County and district councils have
sometimes had different interpretations
of what the national guidance means.
• Some districts feel that the DFG funding
should be automatically passported to
them and its expenditure determined by
them (statutory obligations for housing) -
without reference to strategies
• Counties have frequently argued that
the DFG funding should be considered
strategically as well as individually -
housing crucial to social care.

4. Working together
• Councils have a proven track record in
effectively working with their
communities
• Many positive examples of working
together between counties and
districts
• Examples of successful collaboration
in Gloucestershire, Hertfordshire,
Cambridge, Nottinghamshire, Dorset,
Somerset.
•

5. Joint planning
• It is in the interest for both counties and
districts to plan ahead and develop a joint
approach:
– serves the public well,
– improves outcomes,
– provides value for money,
– contributes to the objectives set out in
the BCF,
– improves efficiency and
– meets the statutory service
responsibilities of both local government
tiers and their savings requirements.

6. Local approach (1)
• Agree joint DFG plans as part of BCF plans at
HWB
• Agree jointly constituted and managed working
group or commissioning body
• Involve district councils and housing providers,
in agreeing the DFG element of local BCF
plans via the HWB.
• Ensure Districts are involved in any local sub-
structures which support countywide HWBs
• County and district chief executives engage
with, and promote, a joint approach to DFG and
BCF planning between their respective
authorities

7. Local approach (2)
• Counties and districts develop a shared approach to
financial assumptions, management of risk mutual
savings and efficiencies, as part of their shared DFG
plan
• Counties and districts need to agree a shared set of
metrics
• DFG funding passported to district councils at agreed
level in-line with joint-plans, or elements of funding
retained at county level to deliver mutually agreed
objectives
• Involvement by the respective parties requires sign-
off and agreement by, at least, a director in each
district and the statutory Director of Adult Social
Services in the county
• Counties and districts agree any mediation and
escalation arrangements where required