Interview with:

·  The Project Manager of In Touch, David Eaton; and

·  An In Touch Caseworker, Tracy Topley.

The Chairman welcomed the Project Manager, David Eaton, the Caseworker, Tracy Topley and a service user, Gladys Walters, from In-Touch Home Improvement Agency, to the meeting and asked them to provide an overview of In-Touch’s work.

In-Touch

Many of the Home Improvement Agencies (HIA) that operated across Kent, East Sussex and Hampshire were a part of the Hyde Housing Group.  The role of the HIA was to help older, disabled and vulnerable people living across a range of tenures to repair, adapt or improve their homes to increase their independence, warmth, security and safety.  The Maidstone HIA was part of In-Touch, Mid and West Kent HIA, having merged with the HIAs of Sevenoaks, Tunbridge Wells and Tonbridge and Malling.  In-Touch was a non-profit organisation and registered as a charity.  As part of the Supporting People Programme, Communities and Local Government (CLG) and Kent Adult Social Services funded approximately 53% of In-Touch’s income.  40% of its income was received from Local Authorities and the rest was received from customer fees, usually included in the grant payment to cover the administration and technical support of its services. 

In-Touch provided a wide range of services across all four Local Authority areas.  This included the management and administration of technical support for Disabled Facilities Grants (DFGs) and Decent Home Grants.  It also commissioned Private Works for residents who had not received grants but wanted technical assistance.  In-Touch provided a handy person service, for which Maidstone Borough Council funded two posts.  It was the first Local Authority in Kent to have funded handy persons to deliver different types of services that services users had asked for, including gardening and decorating.  Maidstone Borough Council was also one of the few Local Authorities that financially supported a hospital discharge service for the Primary Care Trust through In-Touch’s work.  Patients who were unable to be discharged from hospital until their home was made safe were given the appropriate minor aids and adaptations to enable them to be discharged. This service, utilising In-Touch’s handy persons, had been in operation since October 2008 and had successfully assisted in 95 cases.  Another key area of In-Touch’s work included the identification and procurement of Disability and Welfare benefits for customers who were unable or did not have the knowledge and skills to apply.  In-Touch was able to serve as a single point of advice, encouraging users to take up every opportunity available to them.  It had supported residents in securing £83,000 worth of income in 2008/09, including for entitlements to Attendance Allowance and Council Tax Benefit.

Client Base

In-Touch advertised its services to residents through the Council, charitable organisations and religious groups; it also worked closely with the Council to advertise in all its appropriate publications.  In 2008/09 it had received 932 enquiries in the Maidstone area, which were processed by four members of staff.  The 932 enquiries were made up of the following client groups:

·  1.9% = Black Minority and Ethnic (BME) group (in line with  Maidstone’s BME average);

·  3 – 4% = Registered Social Landlord (RSL) Tenants;

·  8% = Rentals;

·  20% = Registered Disabled;

·  75% = Aged 55+; and

·  91% = Owner/Occupier.

In-Touch anticipated that the proportion of RSL tenants would increase in 2009/10 as Maidstone Housing Trust (MHT) and Maidstone Borough Council had piloted a trial for In-Touch to assist MHT tenants in processing DFG applications.

41 referrals in the Maidstone area had been made by In-Touch to the Occupational Therapy Bureau in 2008/09.  The Occupational Therapy Bureau had made 319 customer referrals for In-Touch services.  The rate of referrals had increased in 2009/10, particularly with more referrals for families with young children.

37 DFG Applications in Maidstone had been completed by In-Touch in 2008/09, amounting to £388,000 in grants.  Customer satisfaction questionnaires had revealed that 67% of customers were very satisfied and 28% satisfied.  The length of the process had been cited as the reason why some of the remaining customers had not been satisfied.  Ms Toply highlighted that many clients had waited a number of months for their case to be progressed by the Occupational Therapy Bureau service prior to using In-Touch.  91% of In-Touch’s closed cases had enabled customers to remain living independently in their homes as a direct result of In-Touch and its partners’ interventions.  Ms Topley felt that the practice of Maidstone Borough Council and In-Touch working together made customers feel more in control of the DFG process, with a level of impartiality being achieved for the customer from In-Touch. 

Mrs Walters stated that she had significantly benefited from a DFG-enabled adaptation to her bathroom.  It had taken approximately 18 months from enquiry to completion of works.  She informed Members that she had had difficulties in bathing and that the grant had enabled her to maintain a level of independence, and that it had significantly improved her lifestyle and made her feel safer in her home.  Mrs Walters considered that the bathroom adaptation was of excellent quality and emphasised how grateful she was to have received In-Touch’s assistance in achieving the adaptation.  Mr Eaton highlighted to Members that the rate of falls in the home had a large impact on the NHS, with each occurrence costing in the region of £12,000 to £25,000, as well as the cost to quality of life.

Disabled Facilities Grants

In-Touch’s role with regard to the administration of DFGs included assisting residents with the following: completion of forms; completion of feasibility studies and technical specifications; management of closed tendering processes, using a specialist list of contractors; management of building contracts; completion of tender reports and analysis on behalf of the Council; supervision of works, including sign-off of works in conjunction with the Grants Officer; preparation and processing of final payment documents; and provision of formal exit packs containing guarantees and work schedules.  In addition to this, In-Touch ensured client satisfaction throughout the whole process through interim and final service questionnaires. 

Closed DFG cases had taken an average of 60 weeks from enquiry to completion of works, as the DFG process was complex.  The target time was 45 weeks.  A Member queried what could be done to speed up the process and was advised that even if one aspect was improved, it was likely to be delayed at another point in the process.  The Occupational Therapy Bureau was, however, able to offer interim solutions until the required works were completed, including temporary assistance.  Maidstone Borough Council received electronic applications from In-Touch, which sped up the process by about a week, reduced costs and increased the security of applications.  The other Local Authorities had been approached to follow Maidstone’s example.  In-Touch was also arranging a DFG Best Practice Forum in February 2010, to which relevant agencies would map their processes and procedures to assist in identifying the optimum service model.  Mr Eaton emphasised the importance of ensuring a smooth service, as many of the customers who made applications for DFGs were already urgent cases.  This was because many customers only applied as a last resort, as they had often been reluctant to accept that they needed help, and it was therefore vital to ensure the most effective and efficient process was in place.

In response to a question, Mr Eaton advised the Committee that the relationship with other agencies had not been ideal in the distant past but emphasised that the relationship had now become extremely positive, particularly with Maidstone Borough Council. 

In response to a question regarding unforeseen works, Ms Topley advised Members that building surveyors were involved in the initial stages of determining required works and usually suggested a contingency sum if they suspected complications.  The grant would be reduced if the contingency sum was not required.  However, alternative sources of funding were sought if the awarded grant had been exhausted, including through the Occupational Therapy Bureau or private or charitable funding.  Equity release schemes were not suggested as they took too long.

Advice

DFGs were means-tested and applications could be fast tracked if the customer was in receipt of means-tested benefits, such as Income Based Job Seekers Allowance or Guaranteed Pension Credit.  Maidstone Borough Council applied the means test and required full financial statements if the customer was not on a means-tested benefit.  In-Touch advised customers of what information was likely to be required for the assessment.

The grant process was explained to the service user on the caseworker’s first visit; they explained that grant repayment levies may be sought, at the discretion of the Council, if the customer moved within ten years, and that this may be as a result of their health significantly deteriorating to the point where it was unviable for the customer to remain in their home.  The grant condition was again explained and brought to the attention of the customer by the caseworker at the point of the customer making the application.  The Committee asked the Overview and Scrutiny Officer to determine whether or not the Council had made a claim for any repayments of grant monies.

A Member queried whether In-Touch provided advice to developers to assist them in designing out discrimination on new build houses, for example as part of the Kent Design Guide.  Mr Eaton advised Members that the role of In-Touch was working with Local Authorities in processing grant applications, working with Occupational Therapists to support their recommendations and providing an advocacy service to customers.  However, Hyde Housing Group, its parent organisation, did lobby Government with regard to designing out discrimination.

The Chairman thanked Mr Eaton, Ms Topley and Mrs Walters for an informative presentation and for assisting the Committee in its review. 

The Committee felt that it had been particularly useful to hear about the true benefits of Disabled Facilities Grants to customers and requested that In-Touch be approached to assist in arranging home visits to service users as part of its review.

Resolved:  That

a)  The information received be noted as part of the Committee’s ongoing review of Disabled Facilities Grants;

b)  The Overview and Scrutiny Officer arrange a number of home visits to In-Touch service users with Disabled Facility Grant enabled adaptations for Committee Members; and

c)  The Private Sector Housing Manager advise the Committee about whether the Council had sought any grant repayment monies.