The DWP Review of Housing Benefit: reviewing and remodelling services for tenants with additional needs. This is 3 years old at time of posting in Slideshare: good advice doesn't age badly.

1. The DWP HB Review:
Reviewing and/or re-modelling
your services
Danny Key
23 November 2011

2. Our Agenda Today
Background Context for Housing Benefit reform for
Supported Housing
Analysis of the DWP Proposals
A Critique of the DWP Proposals: what do they
mean?
Service Charge Review
Activity since 9th October 2011
How do Providers respond?
 Review existing service delivery
 Re-model existing service delivery
Barriers to effecting change

3. Background Context to HB reform for
Supported Housing
Public sector reform – public sector expenditure
cuts
Complex regulations, administration &
interpretation – Turnbull factor
Need to keep pace with change of the supported
housing sector, i.e. development of supported
living
The Welfare Reform agenda – Universal Credit

4. An Analysis of the DWP Proposals
Intended to remove bureaucracy and
streamline administration
Categorisation of supported housing into 2
categories:
Unregistered Providers (i.e. not RSLs/RPs)
1. Those providing short-term supported housing services
(Foyers, refuges, hostels & sheltered housing)
2. Those providing longer-term “communal” services (for
people with longer-term needs
Registered Providers (i.e. RSLs/RPs) irrespective of
the type and duration of support provided – unless
charges are determined as unreasonably high

5. A Critique of the DWP Proposals
Money:
Unregistered providers (category 1: unregistered
provider short-term services) will be paid Local
Housing Allowance + a fixed top-up – possibly
based on temporary accommodation arrangements
This fails to recognise the high costs of such services
Many such schemes will be rendered unviable
Unregistered providers (category 2: unregistered
provider long-term services) will be paid Local
Housing Allowance + top-up agreed at local level
Agreed by whom? – possibly whoever has responsibility
for care/support packages (Adult service/SP)

6. A Critique of the DWP Proposals
Will those administering the top-up understand the
true costs of supported housing and/or the cost-benefits
of prevention?
Will the costs be ring-fenced and/or capped?
Registered Providers:
Existing rules apply, i.e. rents only referred if they
are deemed to be “unreasonably high”
Rent Officers must compare like with like rather
than look at general market as per existing rules
What if they compare a Registered Provider (RP)
rent with that of an unregistered scheme that is
subject to LHA + fixed amount?

7. Service Charge Review
Not certain when this will happen....
Liaising with CLG and Welsh/Scottish counterparts –
why? – should be bottom up rather than top down!
“400 different service charges”!?
Actually far, far fewer but many of the same charges are
given different definitions
DWP have however committed to funding the real cost of
additional housing costs...whatever this means...
Potential to establish list of eligible service charges
Important to pass the “reasonableness test” now with
regard to service charges prior to any changes in
legislation.......

8. Service Charge Review
......reasonableness test?....ensuring that you
review or re-model your existing services prior to
the change in regulations to secure
optimised/re-allocation of revenue
Therefore ensuring passporting of Housing
Benefit awards for RPs
True cost recovery appears to only be available
to RPs at present based on consultation
proposals
What about non-RPs?

9. Activity Since 9th October 2011
Very little!
It has been identified that up to 200,000 people in
receipt of supported housing may have been
discounted from initial research undertaken
It has been suggested that DWP will use the amount
of HB payable to all exempt accommodation claims at
date of change in legislation to create ring fenced
budget – nothing to substantiate this suggestion
however this policy would replicate the creation of SP
budget
This policy would stifle development and potentially
enable DWP to manage annual expenditure down just
as occurred with SP budget

10. How do providers respond?
Review existing service delivery
Analyse service delivery based on activity
undertaken
Intention to capture intensive housing
management activity
Re-model service delivery to re-define
service as intensive housing management
or enhanced housing management

11. What is Intensive Housing
Management?
Ordinary housing management functions that are provided
repetitively and intensively
Activity provided over and above ordinary housing
management functions that would be provided to general
needs social/private rented housing
Management, delivery and facilitation of housing services
See Housing Corporation guidance
See staff activity timesheet drafted with intention of
optimising housing management functions Define stand
alone services, i.e. Day/night concierge/housing
management officer

12. How is IHM an eligible service
charge?
 Supported Housing Management Grant (SHMG) was defined to pay
grant to reflect IHM delivery requirements
 SHMG was transferred to Supporting People (SP) as a legacy
funding stream in 2003
 SP does not usually pay for housing management
 No SP Grant conditions
 No local SP eligibility criteria – dependent on funding allocations
 Therefore a requirement to identify IHM
 Target rents don’t recognise IHM
 Service charges are defined in Housing Benefit law as, ‘a service
performed, a facility provided or a right made available’
 IHM is a service performed and can therefore be established as a
service charge

13. Review existing service delivery
Analyse existing staff activity using IHM
definition and guidance
Re-allocate costs based on findings
where opportunity to optimise service
charges and reduce support costs – adjust
job descriptions
Particularly pertinent where SP Grant has
been reduced

14. Re-modelling Service Delivery
Retention of scheme manager – always been
an eligible service charge......it’s the activity
that makes it ineligible or eligible
Re-allocate scheme manager to housing
service charges from support
Provision of floating support service to those
that require support
Signposting is a function of intensive housing
management

15. Re-modelling Service Delivery
Creation of additional roles or redefinition
of existing roles using IHM guidance to
assist re-structure
Any new or re-defined service must be
provided to ALL tenants as a condition of
occupancy

16. Barriers to responding to HB reform
changes
Lack of specific detail within HB reform
proposals – reacting to uncertain future
 Planning difficulty
Persuading Local Authority Housing Benefit
departments to pay for IHM services
Non registered providers??
Change management within the
service/organisation
 Consultation with tenants
 Consultation with staff

17. Registering with TSA
Main benefit - favourable treatment by
Local Authority HB dept.
HB Dept. receives full subsidy on all HB
claims payments
Registration process not particularly
onerous
2 stage process
Preliminary application
Full application

18. Registering with TSA
Preliminary stage (to assess eligibility) – need evidence
that you;
 are an English body (not for profit OR for profit),
 that you provide housing and
 that the housing provided is ‘social’ (low cost rental
accommodation/shared ownership for ‘people not well served by
commercial housing routes’)
Full application – Evidence to demonstrate how you
do/will achieve the 6 standards (through co-regulation
with tenants)
 Governance & Viability
 Client Involvement and Empowerment
 Homes

19. Registering with TSA
 Tenancy
 Neighbourhoods and community
 Value for Money

20. Our Contact Details
Fairgate House
205 Kings Road
Birmingham B11 2AA
0121 707 7766/8881
www.supportsolutions.co.uk
info@supportsolutions.co.uk
Twitter @suppsolutions
www.facebook.com/SupportSolutionsLtd?
sk=wall
20