Agenda item

To receive a report on the Cambridgeshire Home Improvement Agency (CHIA) Shared Service Review and Disabled Facilities Grant Budget.

With the aid of a report by the Housing Strategy Manager (a copy of which is appended in the Minute Book) the Cambridgeshire Home Improvement Agency (CHIA) Shared Service Review and Disabled Facilities Grants (DFGs) report was presented to the Panel. Members were advised that the CHIA shared service had been in operation since 1st April 2012 and required Cabinet approval to be extended for a further two years.

The Panel had been informed that CHIA had dealt with 437 enquiries within the District during 2014/15. Customer satisfaction for the District was 89% which was lower than Cambridge City (97%) and South Cambridgeshire (100%). The average time taken to complete works following a referral within the District was 26.3 weeks on cases costing below £10k and 69.6 weeks on cases costing above £10k. Both were above their respective key performance targets of 26 weeks (below £10k) and 45 weeks (above £10k). It was noted that works costing above £10k are complex involving multi agencies and often require planning permission which accounts for some of the time.

Members noted that CHIA delivered a surplus of £18k at the end of year 3 which had been reinvested in a procurement programme. The Panel was advised that East Cambridgeshire District Council had decided not to join CHIA.

Following a query regarding the timescales Members were informed that the timescales include the entire process from assessment to sourcing quotes to carrying out the work. For low level work such as the installation of a rail, people can access a handyman service so that the work can be carried out swiftly. The Panel requested further statistics on how the time is broken down between lead in time and improvement works.

The Panel discussed the £18k surplus and was advised that it was as a result of the operational budget generating a surplus.

Members were advised that there was more DFGs in the District compared to Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire because the District’s population is larger and older. In addition Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire had council housing and the District does not meaning that the District had to use DFGs to make improvements for those residents living in social housing who are entitled to it whereas the Partner Districts are able to use a different budget to pay for improvements.

Following a question regarding the CHIA agreement the Panel was informed that the original agreement was for three years with an option to extend by a year. At the current time the partner organisations were looking to extend the shared service by two years. Members noted the benefits of the shared service including: saving costs on accommodation, staff and equipment; operational resilience and economies of scale with regards to procurement.

The Panel was concerned with the decrease in Occupational Therapy referrals however Members were informed that this could be a result of a shortage of Occupational Therapists. The service had a problem with regards to recruitment and retention of staff however the problem was out of the Council’s controls as Occupational Therapists were employed by the County Council.

In response to a question regarding accessing DFGs the Panel was advised that the Council provided the DFG and the County Council provided equipment. The Occupational Therapists assess people’s needs and refer them to the CHIA if the claim is a DFG.

With regards to the customer satisfaction survey Members were informed that the main reason why the 11% was not satisfied was because of the workmanship. The Panel was assured that customer feedback would be used to drive service improvements.

Members were advised, in response to a query regarding future builds, that policies reflecting the needs of the ageing population had been included within the Local Plan. The Panel was informed that meant in new developments there would be safer walking routes, elderly people’s housing would be appropriately located and good public transport links. At Alconbury there would potentially be 400 homes for elderly people built.