Written evidence submitted by Progress Housing Group Ltd [EXA 059]

Progress Housing Group owns or manages around 12,000 tenancies. Of this number, around 4,500 are supported living accommodation, provided largely (around 90%) for people with a learning disability or autism. Other primary support needs include long term mental health issues and acquired brain injury.

All of our supported living tenants have high support needs. The majority are of working age and will require continuing support throughout their lives. Many lived in hospital accommodation or in inappropriate residential care settings before moving into supported living. A growing number lived with parents or family members who were unable to provide long term care.

Of the Group’s 4,500 supported living tenancies the majority will fall within the Housing Benefit exempt accommodation category which is the subject of this inquiry, although it is important to note that we cannot be sure of the exact number because we are not always notified of the specific benefit status of each claim by the awarding authority.

The average rent (including Housing Benefit eligible service charge) for our Housing Benefit exempt accommodation is around £235 per week, which we be believe to be at or slightly below the average for the learning disability and autism supported living sector (Funding supported housing for All, Mencap, 2018).

As a registered provider the Group is subject to the Regulator of Social Housing’s regulatory framework, including the Rent Standard. The majority (though not all) of our supported living rents are “excepted” (the regulator’s terminology) from the requirement in the Rent Standard, including the obligation to charge ordinary social housing rents. Within our 4,500 units of supported living accommodation there are two main grounds for such a Rent Standard exception:

1)      Lettings which fall within a private finance initiative (PFI) scheme (around 315), and

2)      Lettings which are defined as Specialised Supported Housing (SSH), (around 3,985).

We believe that all of categories one and two above fall within the Housing Benefit exempt category (as well as being excepted from the Rent Standard).

This leaves around 200 supported living tenancies, which are either subject to the Rent Standard (and do not fall within the Housing Benefit exempt category) or are located in Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland so, we believe, fall outside the scope of this inquiry.

PFI lettings are by definition jointly commissioned with a public authority (in our case, Leeds City Council). Similarly, it is a fundamental requirement of all SSH lettings that the provision has the support of a commissioning authority, usually an adult social care team or a health trust.

A clear appreciation of the two stage process described above (namely, compliance with Rent Standard and separately, compliance with Housing Benefit rules), which all Registered Providers and their tenants must take account of, is crucial to understanding the learning disability and autism supported living sector.

Summary of our views

• Whilst we accept that there are some issues in certain localities and with particular providers, we believe that the majority of supported housing provided by housing associations, including those classified as exempt accommodation under Housing Benefit regulations, are good quality and represent excellent value for money for the public purse. The issues highlighted by the Inquiry in relation “non-commissioned schemes” in some localities are not representative of our sector.
• We believe that there are strong regulatory arrangements in place for Registered Providers (both in terms of quality and value for money) and that expected changes to the Regulator of Social Housing’s regulatory framework relating to consumer standards will further strengthen this regulation.
• Housing Benefit is not the appropriate tool for managing standards in supported housing. The Housing Benefit regulations were not designed for this purpose and it would be unreasonable to expect benefit managers to monitor the quality and value for money of supported housing.
• There should not be different types or levels of oversight purely on the basis of the amount of Housing Benefit received by the tenant.

• We would support additional proportionate measures and accreditation for supported housing providers who are not registered with the Regulator of Social Housing.
• We are concerned about the unintended consequences of additional oversight or changes to Housing Benefit regulations motivated purely because of the failures of one part of the sector.

Comments in response to the Inquiry’s specific questions

• What is the quality of exempt housing provision?

The quality of accommodation provided by Progress Housing is excellent. We have a comprehensive design brief which we use in relation to all newly commissioned schemes. 99.2% of existing schemes meet the Decent Home Standard. The small number of non-compliant lettings were acquired recently as part of a merger and will be fully compliant by December 2022. All schemes are inspected by our own staff at least twice annually. We have a highly effective day to day repairs service along with comprehensive planned repairs and improvement programmes. We have made financial provision for the decarbonisation of the majority of our supported living stock and are working through plans to provide for the remainder.

Much of our stock incorporates design adaptations and/or specialist equipment, provided and/or maintained by ourselves as landlord, to ensure the accommodation is suitable for the needs of our tenants. 

We operate a rolling asset management review process so that homes which no longer meet the needs of our tenants are improved or decommissioned and re-provided elsewhere.

• Is the current model of exempt accommodation financially viable, and does it represent value for money?

We believe that the supported living model provides a better quality of life for the tenants concerned and represents much better value for the public purse than the alternatives. For example, in “Funding Supported Housing for All” (2018) Mencap reported that on average supported living costs £191 per week less than residential care and £1,931 less per week than a hospital inpatient setting. The real saving to the public purse will be discounted somewhat by the higher non housing related benefits to which supported living tenants are entitled, but even taking this into account, the benefits for the taxpayer are huge. Looking just at Progress Housing Group’s provision and assuming that 90% of our supported living is occupied by Housing Benefit exempt tenants at any one time and that the weekly saving per tenancy is only £100, the overall saving to the public purse is well in excess of £20 million per annum. If our supported living accommodation didn’t exist, nearly all of this additional cost would fall on the NHS and on adult social care budgets.

The NHS Long Term Plan works to improve the health of people with a learning disability, autistic people or both and to support them to live well in their own home and we believe that supported living plays a vital role in helping to achieve this aim.

• Are there significant geographical and regional differences in the provision and the problems of exempt accommodation?

In our experience regional differences are limited and are largely created by differences in local commissioning strategies. We do not have access to sufficient data at a national level to comment on the supported living sector more generally.

• What is the proportion of exempt accommodation that is provided by registered compared to non-registered providers, and is an appropriate balance being struck?

We do not have access to any comprehensive data on this subject. However, our anecdotal view is that the vast majority of supported living accommodation for people with a learning disability or autism is owned or managed by Registered Providers.

• What is the proportion of exempt accommodation provided by commissioned compared to non-commissioned providers, and is an appropriate balance being struck?

All of our accommodation provision is supported by commissioners. As explained in our introduction, most Housing Benefit exempt accommodation landlords which are also Registered Providers must also demonstrate that their rents are excepted from the Rent Standard. All of the main Rent Standard exceptions require the landlord to demonstrate commissioner support.

• How does whether a provider is registered or non-registered, or commissioned or non-commissioned, impact the quality of provision?

We believe that the vast majority of supported living accommodation for our core client groups is provided by Registered Providers, however, we do not have access to data to comment on relative condition, other than to emphasise that the accommodation which we provide meets the high safety and other standards expected in the regulated sector.

• How should exempt accommodation be provided and what should the service cost?

Supported living accommodation, particularly for people with a learning disability or autism, is a precious national resource. Demand is growing significantly, particularly as life expectancies continue to increase. Some action to deal with specific problems or abuses in the Housing Benefit exempt sector is clearly necessary, but it is important that this does not undermine the vital work being carried out by the majority of providers.

The biggest driver of rent levels in the supported living sector, for those lettings which are excepted from the Rent Standard, is the initial capital cost of a given scheme. This is in turn affected by a number of factors, such as location and the specific support needs of the tenant or tenants. For example, some tenants with very high support needs, including mobility issues, may need more space for themselves and for support staff than others with lower support needs. In addition, by its nature, accommodation of this type is provided in small numbers and is dispersed widely within the communities where the demand exists. It would be neither possible nor desirable to locate all supported living accommodation in large clusters, nor to provide it entirely in the lowest house price areas.

SSH is the main way in which supported living for people with a learning disability or autism has been provided by the Registered Provider sector, the principal reason being that the grant system has been unable to meet the needs of this client group. A small amount of grant funded accommodation has been provided, but generally grants have not been high enough to meet the additional capital costs referred to above and the grant system has not been flexible enough to meet the commissioners’ demands in relation to design, location and speed of provision.

For these reasons, the Housing Benefit system must be sufficiently flexible to take account of these variations in scheme costs.

• How should the regulatory oversight of exempt accommodation be organised?
• What should be the regulations governing exempt accommodation and how should those regulations be enforced?

For Registered Providers, we believe that regulation provided by the Regulatory of Social Housing is adequate and effective. Amongst other things, Registered Providers are obliged to pay full attention to value for money when taking all of their key strategic decisions, including investment and rent setting.

We would argue that action by the Regulator of Social Housing in relation to a number of “lease based providers”, most of which, we would assume, also fall within the category of Housing Benefit exempt accommodation providers, is evidence of the regulatory system working.

We do not believe that Housing Benefit rules are an appropriate tool for managing or regulating quality and for this reason we would argue that the existing rules are broadly adequate.

We would be broadly supportive of a new registration or accreditation scheme for supported housing landlords who are not registered with the Regulatory of Social Housing. Such a scheme could be operated by local authorities.

On a separate but related matter, we would also argue that the Rent Standard should itself be updated, particularly the provisions relating to SSH. An example would be to allow schemes to be part funded by capital grant and part by rents which are above normal social housing rent levels, perhaps on a sliding scale. This would encourage more grant input to this particular sector and reduce the upward pressure on rents which a complete absence of grant creates. It would also allow “excepted” rents to be brought within the terms of the Rent Standard.

• Is there sufficient publicly available information about exempt accommodation?

There is very limited information available at both national and local levels about the different types of both Housing Benefit exempt and Rent Standard excepted accommodation. More information would assist with policy making and planning more generally and in this regard we strongly support the suggestion made in both the National Statement of Expectations and the Social Care White Paper that more attention should be paid to identifying supported housing needs and planning to meet those needs at the local level.

January 2022