Agenda item

To consider progress against the recommendations arising from the Disabled Facilities Grants review. 

56.1           The report of the Head of Community Services, circulated at Pages No. 65-72, provided an update on progress against recommendations arising from the Disabled Facilities Grants (DFGs) Review.  Members were asked to consider the report and whether it would be more appropriate to receive updates on an annual, as opposed to six monthly basis, going forward.

56.2           Members were advised that updated progress against the recommendations was set out at Appendix 1 to the report; all outstanding recommendations were intrinsically connected to the funding and delivery of DFGs which was under review by both central government and the Gloucestershire Clinical Commissioning Group. 

56.3           A Member drew attention to Action 1 - those enquiring who may be eligible for DFGs to be supported to see if a possible move to more suitable accommodation would be a better outcome for them, and to provide suitable assistance and support to make this happen, should the person so wish - a Member questioned whether this meant there were people who could have had their properties adapted.  In response, the Head of Community Services advised that Officers worked closely with Severn Vale Housing Society and other registered providers to assist people to have adaptations.  The Member sought clarification as to how many people had attended the workshop for builders and agents in May 2017 which had been held as part of Action 2 - Look at methods of procuring work, such as (but not limited to) schedules of rates and preferred contractors, as ways that could reduce the time taken for a contractor to be on site, which had been marked as complete - and how many had registered as a result.  The Head of Community Services indicated that he did not have the figures for how many had registered but he had attended the workshop and there had been 10-12 local tradesmen present.  He had looked at the website earlier that day and there was a fairly good list of tradesman, both locally and within the Gloucestershire area; he undertook to find out the exact figures and advise Members following the meeting.  The Member questioned whether DFGs could be promoted in a better way given that the budget was underspent and he was advised that, whilst the Council could advertise the fact that DFGs were available, applicants needed to be assessed by an Occupational Therapist from Gloucestershire County Council who would then make a referral so eligibility and need was not within the remit of the Borough Council.  In terms of promotion, DFGs were advertised on the Council website and a new leaflet had recently been produced which he circulated around the table.  The report stated that £167,618.61 had been spent on DFGs up to 30 September 2017; however, he had received updated figures that week which showed that this was now £318,000 so there had been an increase.  His best guess was that the final spend would be on par with the previous year. 

56.4           A Member noted from Paragraph 2.3 of the report that the contract to deliver the Gloucestershire “Safe at Home” Home Improvement Agency service had ceased at the end of July 2017 and he questioned whether this had impacted on DFGs.  He knew Gloucestershire County Council had difficulty recruiting Occupational Therapists in the past, and he doubted that the situation had improved in recent years, so he assumed this would also slow down the process.  The Head of Community Services indicated that he was unable to comment on recruitment but, once the referral had been made to the Council, Officers were able to move at pace.  The Home Improvement Agency had acted as an agent for those people who wanted to apply for a grant but were unable to do it themselves and Council Officers now provided that level of support.  The number of applications made through the Home Improvement Agency had been minimal – less than 20% of total applications – and it was noted that it had also taken a percentage for acting as an agent, effectively reducing the grant.  As such, the impact of the cessation of the Safe At Home service had not been significant.

56.5           A brief debate ensued as to whether it would be appropriate for the Committee to receive an annual update on progress against the recommendations arising from the DFGs review in future.  A Member expressed the view that he would be more comfortable to continue to receive the report on a six monthly basis until the impact of the Universal Credit roll-out had been established.  Another Member indicated that he was aware from another meeting that reducing hospital admissions, where alternative care could be provided, was an issue that was currently being considered and any new procedures could have an impact on DFGs.  The Chief Executive explained that the amount which the Council received for DFGs was quite high, given the size of the authority and the population of the borough, and this had been questioned.  It was quite possible that the situation with hospital discharges and trying to get people back into their own homes as quickly as possible would have an impact on referrals and it would be prudent to continue to monitor the situation on a six monthly basis in accordance with Members’ wishes.  It was subsequently

RESOLVED          1.  That the progress against the recommendations arising from the Disabled Facilities Grants review be NOTED.

2.  That reports continue to be brought to the Committee on a six monthly basis.