1. Report Summary

A review of the services provided by Solon South West Housing Association Limited was carried out by Rebecca Potter on behalf of Bath and North East Somerset (B&NES) Supporting People Team in February 2007. The review found the services to be strategically relevant to B&NES Supporting People programme. The service presented good value for money and was assessed at level B in all areas under the quality assessment framework. Service users consulted are happy with the services they receive and other stakeholders viewed Rackfield House as a valuable resource which makes a positive contribution locally. 

2. Introduction to Agency

Rackfield House was developed in partnership with Bath City Council in 1986 to meet the needs of single homeless people in the city. In May 2007 Rackfield House will celebrate its 21st anniversary. It is the only supported housing scheme managed by Solon South West Housing Association Ltd.  The project aims to provide good quality temporary accommodation with support for 20 single, homeless people aged between 18  and 65 years.  Rackfield House aims to provide support and advice to enable service users to enhance their quality of life, whilst assisting them in working towards securing and maintaining permanent move-on accommodation in the community.  All service users have a keyworker and a support plan which is needs led and outcomes focused.

Service users can apply directly to Rackfield House and many people are referred by partner organisations including the Probation Service, B&NES Housing Advice Team, Julian House(Bath Churches Housing Association), and the Drugs and Homeless Initiative (DHI).

3. Brief History

The Provider was previously reviewed in July 2005 and it found the service to be strategically relevant to B&NES Supporting People programme. In 2005 the service presented reasonable value for money and was assessed at level C in all areas under the quality assessment framework as laid out by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM). Service users consulted are pleased with the services they received.  The 2005 review outcomes and recommendations were as follows:

1.                  The level of preparation and planning for the review was thorough and comprehensive.  Evidence was made accessible to the SP Review Team and  staff were on hand to provide additional information as required.  The Quality Assessment Framework was clearly being used as a self assessment tool.

2.         The review thoroughly validated QAF objectives C1.1 to C1.5 at level C, and C1.6 at Level B.  It is a recommendation that the annual self assessment QAF be submit in September 06 to evidence attainment of a level B across all six core objectives.

3.         The Review found that management and frontline staff at Rackfield House are well trained, skilled and experienced and are committed to delivering the best possible service for its users.  Solon SW HA appears to have a strong commitment to ensuring that staff are offered useful training and professional development opportunities.  

4.         In line with ODPM guidance, it is a recommendation that Rackfield House identify 3 supplementary QAF objectives before Dec 05 that complement the ongoing service monitoring and evaluation and report progress on these in the annual self assessment

5.         With reference to achieving better value for money and continued strategic relevance, it is recommended that funding remains at current levels on condition that Rackfield House accepts a greater proportions of service users who are deemed to have higher support needs. We would expect these service users to be referred/nominated by mental health services, Probation and the Housing Advice Team in B&NES. We require the Provider to set targets which are challenging yet sustainable within the current capacity of the project, and to agree formal protocols with the above services to this end.  The Review found that Rackfield House has already begun this work for which it is to be commended; formal joint working protocols are already in place with Julian House(Bath Churches Housing Association), and the Avon and Somerset Prolific Offender Scheme.

6.         Consultations with staff indicated that some service users are not engaging with the support offered and that often support/keyworking sessions occur in an ad hoc, rather than a structured way.  The provider needs to develop strategies for ensuring that all service users participate and engage in the support plan and review process. 

7.         Rackfield House has traditionally catered for white men and client record data indicates that this group still accounts for the majority of service users although recently Rackfield Househas accepted more women and people from BOME groups. With reference to fair access, diversity and inclusion, the Review found that there is an Action Plan in place which aims to address this issue and to ensure that service users at Rackfield House represent all sectors of the community. We now require the provider to report progress to date in this area and to advise on how it intends to continue to take this work forward.

 8.        The Review found that service users are frequently remaining at Rackfield House beyond the time when they are ready to move on into independent accommodation.  Three service users had been at Rackfield House for more than two years and a further six had lived there for more than one year. There are various reasons for this ‘silt up’ including the lack of one bedroom properties available through the Homeseekers Register (HR), and the reluctance of service users to consider renting in the private sector. The challenge for the Provider is to work more closely both with service users and housing providers in the B&NES area, (including private landlords), to ensure that service users can secure properties to enable timely move on to independent accommodation.

9.         Between July 2004 and the end of March 2005 a total of twelve service users left Rackfield House.  Of these, seven moved on in a planned way.  This represents 58% of those who moved on. The challenge for the Provider is to increase both of these totals. 

10.       The stipulation that in all cases applicants with drug and/or alcohol issues have to have been abstinent in the community for three months can exclude potential service users at a time when they are particularly vulnerable.  It is recommended that Rackfield House relaxes this requirement to one month’s abstinence.

 11.      The Provider indicated that it planned to offer a resettlement service for service users who move on.  Consultations with service users indicated that at least some felt they would require help with resettlement. It is a recommendation that more detailed information regarding this service be provided, together with a delivery plan.

12.       This report is a public document and will be placed on the Bath and North East Somerset Website.  Rackfield House must share the Review recommendations and outcomes with Service Users and complete an Action Plan by October 2005.   

6.  Service Capacity and Funding

7. Are the Services Strategically Relevant

The review found that the service provided by Solon South West Housing Association at Rackfield House fits with the local and national context of strategic relevance. The 20 beds provided at Rackfield House provide a valuable resource for single people who have low to medium support needs and who are in housing need. Rackfield House supports service users to develop their skills to live independently in their own accommodation.  In the period since the last review, the Provider has introduced a time-limited, (up to 6 months) resettlement service to support clients when they move on to independent accommodation . The review found that the services did not include the provision of general health, social or personal care.

The B&NES Supporting People Five Year Strategy has a number of strategic objectives in addition to specific aims for individual service user groups.  In the context of this review Rackfield House is able to demonstrate that its services meet a number of strategic objectives and service user aims.

Objective 4 – Decrease Levels of homelessness through the provision of preventative services. The support provided at Rackfield House will equip service users with the skills required for independent living and tenancy sustainment, thus making repeat homelessness less likely in the future.

Objective 6 – Providing services which help to promote the health, safety and well being of individuals and of the wider community.  The Provider continues to  work in  partnership with the Avon and Somerset Prolific Offender Scheme and takes referrals from a number of agencies including Community Mental Health Teams, (CMHT), and the Drugs and Homelessness Initiative, (DHI) among others.

Objective 8 – Improving the provision of services for people who may be hard to reach or who are socially excluded.  Service users at Rackfield House include those who have mental health problems, a history of rough sleeping and past drug and alcohol problems.

Following publication of the ODPM’s five year plan, Sustainable Communities: Homes for All, in March 2005 the government published its’ strategy for tackling homelessness. In Settled Homes: Changing lives, the government have acknowledged the link between homelessness  prevention and the provision of support. The overall aim of the strategy is to reduce the numbers living in temporary accommodation by 2010. The specific aims are to expand housing opportunities for all including those who need additional support and/or are disadvantaged.  Another aim is to reduce homelessness by offering range of preventative measures.  Rackfield House is a low support project which has been successful in the past in enabling service users to move on into independent accommodation in a planned way. 

Referral data and feedback from service users demonstrates that the majority of service users access Rackfield House at a time when they are either homeless, threatened with homelessness, or in insecure accommodation.  These service users are therefore enabled to resolve their housing crises and some may avoid having to present as homeless at Bath & North East Somerset Council.

Whilst at Rackfield House service users are supported to gain the independent living skills and overcome other difficulties in order to be ready to successfully move on into independent tenancies within two years.

9. Consultation with Stakeholders

Service Users, key stakeholders and staff were consulted during the review.

9.1 Consultation with Service Users

A total of six service users (ie 30% of current SUs) were interviewed individually at Rackfield House by Rebecca Potter on behalf of Bath and North East Somerset Council’s Supporting People Team

9.1a Consultation Findings

• Service users were very positive about their experiences at Rackfield House.  Everyone had confidence in the staff whom they said were hardworking and very good at their jobs.
• Two service users were referred by B&NES Housing Advice Team, another was referred by Julian House, (Bath churches Housing Association), another by DHI, one by Probation and one by North Wiltshire County Council. All were either homeless or living with relatives and unable to continue to do so.
• Only one service users felt that they had to wait any length of time before they could move in.  All the others said they moved in within a couple of weeks of being referred.
• Of those interviewed, service users had lived at Rackfield House for between four months and fifteen months. 
• All were very satisfied with the standard of accommodation but felt that bathrooms could be improved with the installation of showers.  Service users had not had any maintenance problems and they reported that any minor repairs were dealt with quickly.
• None of the service users interviewed had had cause to complain about any aspect of the service, although one person reported that he had had difficulties sharing with a housemate, and as a result they he was moved to another house.  He was happy with this outcome.
• Everyone felt that Rackfield House is a safe and secure place to live.  CCTV had recently been installed and service users said they were comfortable with this.
• All service users have a keyworker and a support plan which covers all aspects of life and has specific aims.  People met with their keyworkers on a weekly or fortnightly basis. And all appointments are prearranged and lasted for about an hour.  Everyone said that they found their support plans useful and motivating and that they were gaining independence as a result of them.  Frequent reviews enabled people to really appreciate the progress they were making in their lives.
• Three of service users reported that their keyworkers had attended joint meetings with them and other agencies including Probation, and DHI. They felt that this was helpful.
• Service users reported that staff have a good knowledge of local agencies able to offer support in other areas, e.g. Bath South CMHT, the Citizens Advice Bureau, (CAB),  DHI, BADAS.
• Service users reported that they are kept informed about developments and their views are sought through a number of methods including residents meetings, annual survey, newsletters and support meetings.  One service user said more frequent residents meetings would be useful and one person said he had talked with staff about becoming the Residents’ Representative.
• Service users felt that the stable accommodation and support at Rackfield House had turned their lives around.  They felt motivated to engage and make changes to their lives and all aspired to move on to full independence. 
• Two service users reported that they were seriously considering the private rented sector as a realistic move on option, although one of these said they had been advised by their keyworker to ‘wait for council’.  Everyone else was hoping to move into social housing. The expense of renting privately and a perceived lack of security of tenure were reported as being barriers to renting in the private sector.
• Two service users reported that they had firm move on plans in place and all of these were on the Assisted Move On Scheme, (AMOS) through the Homeseekers Register.  Another was beginning to look at options.  All reported that they would require assistance with resettlement and knew that this support would be offered by Rackfield House when they move on.

9.2 Consultation with Staff

All staff based at Rackfield House were consulted by Rebecca Potter as part of the Review, including the two Housing Support Workers , and the Scheme Manager.  In addition consultations were held with the Supported Housing Officer, (SHO), who oversees Rackfield House and Solon’s other supported housing projects  and is based at Solon SW HA’s head office in Bristol.

9.2a Consultation Findings

There have been no changes in staffing since the last review. 

• Staff had clearly been working hard towards achieving many of the recommendations made by the earlier review. In particular:
•        the Provider has taken referrals for people who appear to have more complex support needs, many of whom are engaging with other agencies including CMHTs, DHI, Probation, Avon and Somerset Prolific Offenders Scheme etc. Staff have engaged in more joint working as a result including three way meetings with Probation and where service users are subject to DRR their Keyworking appointments are now included in their DRR planners.   
•        A resettlement service is now in place for service users who move on from Rackfield House into their own accommodation. Staff reported that this has increased their workloads but they have managed to absorb this by careful planning and time management. Staff reported that outcomes for service users are positive.
•        A higher proportion of women and people from black and other minority ethnic groups have accessed Rackfield House since the last review.
•        Staff have made efforts to raise the profile of Rackfield House in the local community.  Publicity information has been sent to GP surgeries and this had generated phone calls requesting application forms.  Staff have also visited the Bath Islamic Centre who then referred a service user.
• Training opportunities have continued to be offered to staff.  Everyone has recently attended courses in the Protection of Vulnerable Adults, and one staff member had attended an Equal Opportunities course run by Support Against Racist Incidents, (SARI).
• Staff reported that everyone has a support plan which includes an action plan with timescales.  They said that they are now working more proactively with service users, and are more focused, ensuring that they prompt service users to consider all aspects of their lives.
• Staff have continued to explore ways to ensure that service users engage in the support on offer at Rackfield House.  A greater emphasis has been placed on the requirement to engage with support at the time of sign up.  They also attempt to be flexible in building relationships with those service users who are ‘harder to engage’. Staff work late on Thursday evenings and at these times the communal room and computer is open for all to use. Residents meetings, (with food laid on!),  are also held at this time and they are well attended.  Staff have also helped service users to access courses run by the Community Education Team in Twerton including cooking, and art and craft activities.
• Monthly  newsletters are produced for service users.  The last one included a section on the forthcoming Supporting People Review, and the allocations policy. Service users’ views and feedback are sought in this.
• Service users views are also sought via the annual Residents Survey. Eleven out of twenty residents responded to the last one and of these ten reported that they were either satisfied or very satisfied with the service overall.  Staff were in favour of involving service users more and thought a residents’ representative was a good idea, however, they felt it might be a challenge to get someone to volunteer in this role.
• In Bristol Solon SW HA employs a Resident Involvement Officer to support a Tenants’ Forum.
• The Scheme Manager represents Rackfield House on the Housing and Drug Working Group and the SP Provider Forum in B&NES.
• In the twelve month period from January 2006 three service users remained at Rackfield House for more than two years.  Staff agreed that this was not ideal and that it had occurred because there were delays through the AMOS scheme for a variety of reasons.
• In addition to the five AMOS places available to service users,  Rackfield House also has access to two direct lets per year from Knightstone Housing Association.
• Staff said that they inform service users about their option to move on into the private rented sector, (PRS).  However they reported that  they have reservations about encouraging service users to access the PRS because of the uncertainty around the quality of the accommodation. Few private rented properties are accredited and it is difficult to be sure that a property and a landlord will be suitable for service users moving on from Rackfield House.  The weekly property section of the Bath Chronicle is made available for service users and over the past twelve months one service user moved on into the PRS.

9.3 Consultation with Other Stakeholders

The views of other stakeholders, including staff from Bath Churches Housing Association,  DHI, BADAS, and the Housing Advice Team were sought during the course of several face-to-face and telephone interviews. Interviews were conducted by Rebecca Potter on behalf of the Bath & NE Somerset Supporting People Team.

9.3a Consultation Findings

• Stakeholders reported that there is high demand for the services provided at Rackfield House. Voids are filled quickly with applicants from the waiting list.
• Stakeholders were aware of the referral criteria and reported that the form was easy to complete. Staff kept them informed of the progress of referrals and copied them into the decision regarding acceptance/refusal.
• Stakeholders with joint working protocols in place reported that they were working well and the process of agreeing them had been useful and contributed to cooperative working.  
• Stakeholders reported that applicants who are turned down by Rackfield House are informed in writing of the reason why and they are also informed of their right to appeal the decision. These service users are signposted to other projects and possible sources of support. Staff have good knowledge of other agencies and support available locally and are proactive in referring clients to specialist services.
• Stakeholders did not report any problems concerning applicants being turned down. In fact they stated that since the last SP review it has been noticeable that service users who have higher support needs have been accepted.
• Members of the Housing Advice Team felt that it would be useful if support workers could take a more proactive role around move on and the private rented sector.
• Members of the Housing Advice Team reported that the nominations agreement in place is not particularly useful because service users with priority for housing under the homelessness legislation often have high support needs which cannot be met at Rackfield House.  They suggested that it would be more useful to have nomination rights for service users who have not been assessed as being in priority need yet have support needs and are also in housing need.
• Stakeholders reported that Rackfield House makes a positive contribution towards community safety by providing stable supported accommodation for a number of service users who have long histories of offending behaviour and issues around drugs and alcohol and who may be subject to DRR’s.
• There was a general consensus that the team at Rackfield House communicates well with other stakeholders and that staff take a very positive and proactive approach.