Written evidence submitted by Nottingham City Homes [HOP 067]
Communities and Local Government Committee – Housing for Older People Inquiry
1.1) This written evidence is submitted by Nottingham City Homes (NCH) which is an Arms Length Management Organisation (ALMO) managing and maintaining around 27,300 tenant and leasehold properties on behalf of Nottingham City Council, as well as on behalf of other landlords. The NCH group is the largest housing provider in Nottingham. As an ALMO, NCH is wholly owned by Nottingham City Council, a local authority. The group also includes a subsidiary company owning dwellings for market rent, and is planning a subsidiary that is a Registered Provider of Social Housing.
1.2) Nottingham City Homes currently provides 2,050 units of sheltered housing for older people in 63 housing complexes situated in all neighbourhoods in the City. We are just starting a flagship Extra Care scheme that will include two existing sheltered housing tower blocks. In addition we manage over 2,200 bungalows, a majority of these are occupied by older people.
1.3) NCH also provides a major telecare home alarm service across the local area, with 24 hour, 365 day provision, delivered to around 9,000 households for a modest weekly charge. This is provided to households that wish to subscribe to it, irrespective of tenure. A majority of customers are older people. Such services make a major contribution to helping older people live independently, with the reassurance that they can summon assistance from skilled, locally based call handlers at any time.
1.4) NCH is submitting evidence to the inquiry in respect of the existing work we do to provide housing for older people, and because we believe there is significant additional potential to provide more and better housing for this group of people, which will free up additional accommodation for others in housing need in different age groups. We also believe that through active intervention to help people secure suitable and appropriate older people’s accommodation, demands on health and social care services can be reduced.
2.1) We believe that more adequate provision of homes for older people would facilitate downsizing amongst a larger proportion of people, freeing up family type housing in greater numbers. However, it is necessary for the housing ‘product’ concerned to be attractive. For example homes may need to be capable of suitable adaptations to meet the needs of residents, who will often have lived in their existing home for a great many years and find it convenient to their needs. Availability of homes in suitable areas is of significant importance. People will often have valuable social and family networks, as well as familiar local services (retail, social centres, access to public transport and medical services for example) that they may not wish to move away from. Few people wish to be forced into moving by any change, and those who no longer have to move for reasons like employment, are less likely to do so. It is therefore of the utmost importance that people are offered positive reasons for moving. We want older people’s housing to have a “pull” factor where people want to live rather than a “push” factor of feeling they have to move because of their age. The quality and design of older people’s housing is critical in this regard.
2.2) Where brownfield land presents opportunities for redevelopment, it creates the chance to build different types of new housing in close proximity to existing homes, helping to allow people to maintain community links. NCH has demonstrated this with its award winning Palmer Court[1] Scheme (LABC Building Excellence Award – Best New Social Housing), of 54 apartments for older residents. Following clearance of a site of five tower blocks the decision was taken to re-provide with a mix of family and specialist older people’s accommodation on the site. This was a deliberate attempt to ensure better housing mix in the neighbourhood, and ‘state of the art’ older people’s accommodation was an important aspect of that. Including significant measures to ensure reduced energy use, accommodation of this sort can make a significant contribution to tackling fuel poverty, a major issue for older people who may spend a greater proportion of their time in their own home than someone of working age, with commensurately increased energy usage.
2.3) There is also a need to help facilitate moving, so older people can be closer to family and support networks. As education and employment opportunities take people further away from their locations of birth, family support networks are less easy to maintain over longer distances. This places increased pressure on health and care services because the support of family networks that can work well over short distances are simply not available when children move much further away to access work. Facilitating moves to permit these links can be important, and this applies in the private sector where differences in regional housing costs may make it harder for older people wishing to move closer to their adult children, if that means a move from a lower cost to a higher cost housing market.
2.4) Councils, Arm’s Length Housing Management Organisations (ALMOs) and other social housing providers are well placed to provide more suitable accommodation, as long as financial regulations and freedoms permit it. The sector has a strong track record of building appropriate accommodation for older people, including housing like bungalows, which are a common way of meeting the housing needs of older people in an environment that is adaptable for future use, and always popular.
2.5) NCH has used its building programme (http://www.nottinghamcityhomes.org.uk/your-neighbourhood/building-a-better-nottingham/) to provide new bungalows on sites that are part of or close to existing established housing estates. This has been achieved by building on small plots of land on the estates (often former lock up garage sites) that are unused and have previously attracted anti-social behaviour. Such sites are not generally attractive to commercial developers, but provide an important supply of land for modest scale schemes. In our current building programme NCH has built or has in the pipeline 123 bungalows on 13 sites across Nottingham. Virtually all current bungalow development in the city is being led by NCH. Given the choice, a private developer will normally choose any property type other than a bungalow to build, in order to maximise return from the footprint of the development site.
2.6) In developing new bungalows NCH has:
2.7) Unfortunately, changes like the required social housing rent reduction policy have undermined business plans that could have generated higher levels of suitable new build social housing.
3.1) NCH believes that greater focus on delivering specialist older people’s housing would make a significant contribution to meeting wider housing needs, through freeing up other accommodation. It would also have the benefit of increasing the supply of housing more suited to the needs of older people (addressing mobility and access issues, support needs, tackling social isolation). Our own experience is that new bungalows and high quality specialist older persons’ housing has a “pull” factor which encourages people to downsize voluntarily.
3.2) It is important to note that there are also older people who themselves are carers, not always simply for their own partners, but on occasion for adult disabled children who have always lived with their parents, who are their primary carers.
3.3) Increased longevity also means that older people who live independently are often cared for by their children, who themselves are over 60 (elderly filial carers). Housing solutions that work for people in these circumstances will be of increasing importance as the numbers of people in these circumstances increase.
3.4) There is also the important work required to ensure that investment is available to allow existing older persons accommodation to remain fit for purpose.
3.5) A lot of local authority older people’s accommodation was constructed in the 1960s/1970s (typically built as ‘sheltered housing schemes’). This reflected a growing awareness of demographic changes and projected longer life spans, and was a significant achievement. Unfortunately many of those sheltered accommodation schemes failed to anticipate changing expectations and design requirements amongst the residents they were intended for. Flats are often rather small, and if one bedroom, have no provision for visiting relatives or carers to stay. It is now common for residents to overcome mobility issues using mobility scooters, but schemes with flats accessed off corridors often do not have wide enough access for such scooters. Some low rise schemes were not fitted with lifts, creating accessibility issues for flats above the ground floor.
3.6) Furthermore, land available at the time was often in slum clearance areas in inner city neighbourhoods, as a consequence disproportionate numbers of units were constructed in neighbourhoods that due to other social trends, forty years on have a younger demographic, and are not popular with older people who have already opted to live in different areas.
3.7) These factors create serious demand issues. Over the last 6 – 8 years NCH has decommissioned several such sheltered housing complexes. In some cases the accommodation has been suitable for other age groups to use, however, on occasion the buildings are not capable of cost effective adaption and thus redevelopment has been the option pursued.
3.8) The lesson learned is to ensure that buildings are ‘future proofed’ - capable of cost effective adaption to take account of the changing needs of older people, or the changing demand for accommodation where they are located.
3.9) Where existing accommodation is assured of future demand NCH is working to ensure social housing schemes for older people remain an attractive housing product, and an option of choice for older people. This is often as simple as ensuring that suitable financial investment is available to maintain what commercial letting agents would term ‘kerb appeal’.
3.10) The NCH programme to help ensure these properties remain attractive is called Grander Designs[3], this involves a move away from the ‘sheltered housing’ terminology to rebrand schemes as ‘Independent Living’, along with redesigning and renovating schemes to meet the needs and expectations of today’s older residents.
3.11) Again, HAPPI principles are involved in the redesign work (including, for example, ‘dementia friendly’ floor and wall coverings), improved facilities for mobility scooters and other enhancements. Our experience is that working with residents to modernise these schemes, sometimes through low cost redecoration and refurnishing works, can turn a scheme from low demand into one with a waiting list. Good design makes a world of difference.
3.12) Our learning from this work has informed plans for the development of our second completely new Independent Living Scheme in north west Nottingham (replacing the former Stepney Court). NCH is also carrying out major enhancements to two popular 1960s tower blocks, in the Sherwood district of the City, located in a mature parkland setting. This will update the blocks, add new specialist accommodation at the site and create an ‘extra care’ facility, providing around 220 apartments with access to care and support. These ‘extra care’ facilities will enable residents to remain living independently as their needs change in the future.
4 Topic - The extent to which improving specialist housing provision in England could improve people’s health and wellbeing, and deliver savings in public expenditure.
4.1) NCH firmly believes that specialist housing can improve health and wellbeing. However, in this section NCH would like to highlight the work carried out by our ‘Hospital to Home’ project here in Nottingham. This is designed to help improve housing circumstances for older people leaving hospital, and assist in preventing re-admission in order to deliver savings in NHS costs. The project, delivered with Nottingham City Care Partnership, aims to make a significant contribution to reducing NHS costs by working in partnership with the health service locally to find ways of reducing hospital admissions, and where possible, other related NHS interventions. The service is delivered by dedicated Housing Health Co-ordinator staff.
4.2) We are extremely pleased with the success of our initial pilot. We have found that:
4.3) NCH believes that this pilot project is a very clear illustration of how social housing providers can work closely with local health services to achieve very positive outcomes for people. So long as a continued supply of suitable accommodation is available, we can continue to contribute to helping save NHS resources. Our initial evaluation report indicates savings of £667,000 delivered for the investment of £89,100, or every £1 invested creates £6.55 in savings[4].
4.4) We would also highlight the increasing importance of assistive technology (telecare and telehealth systems) in enabling older people to remain in their own home, and that consideration of such assistive technology applications should increasingly be part of the ‘mainstream’ older persons housing offer. On-going advances in the technology and monitoring equipment available provides real advantages for people with the equipment in their homes, family members and carers, and health and social care services.
5 Topic - Whether a national strategy for the support of housing provision specifically for older people is needed.
5.1) Much of the focus of the national debate on housing shortages surrounds issues of supply in general, and issues of affordability especially for first time buyers. This means that there is a tendency for strategies to focus on addressing these important needs. However, it is very probable that housing for people in those groups would increase in supply if there was increased focus on appropriate housing options for older people. A national strategy in this area would help providers across the social rented and private sector, address this issue by creating a clear focus on the matter, with an expectation of appropriate actions and outcomes.
6 Conclusions and Recommendations
6.1) Our experience at NCH proves that if older person’s housing is an attractive product it will encourage people to move to free up existing accommodation (for example family housing).
6.2) The importance of family and social networks, as well as access to services, needs to be considered when locating housing for older people.
6.3) Brownfield land and infill sites are opportunities to provide older people’s housing in locations that are close to where people have lived for many years, and where they enjoy living.
6.4) Buildings that minimise energy use to tackle fuel poverty are particularly important for older people.
6.5) Policy needs to give due regard to facilitating moves between different housing markets if it helps older people move closer to where family support networks can be available.
6.6) Local authorities and ALMOs have a track record of providing significant quantities of general needs and specialist accommodation suitable for older people, but could deliver more if financial freedoms permitted it. Recent delivery of up to date housing for older people illustrates what can be achieved.
6.7) It is important for existing older people’s housing to receive investment to ensure it remains an attractive and fit for purpose option for a group whose needs are changing as a consequence of demographic change.
6.8) Demographic change will inevitably mean that housing for older people that is fit for purpose today will need to be altered and adapted as residents grow older. The ability to ‘future proof’ such housing cost effectively needs to be a design requirement at construction stage in order to save costs in years to come.
6.9) Through joint working, there is greater scope for housing providers to help health and social care providers meet the challenges they face, in a manner which helps save financial resources. Valuable lessons can be learned from pilot projects like Nottingham’s Hospital to Home scheme.
6.10) Telecare assistive technology can play a major role in helping older people to live independently and support them in their housing choices.
6.11) A national strategy to support the provision of housing for older people would give clear direction to achieving a number of outcomes that would be of benefit to the housing market overall.
[1] http://www.nottinghamcityhomes.org.uk/about-us/news-and-newsletters/latest-news/nottingham-claims-countrys-best-new-social-housing-scheme/
[2] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/housing-our-ageing-population-panel-for-innovation
[3] http://www.nottinghamcityhomes.org.uk/your-home/independent-living/grander-designs/
and an example of a property being featured to let is here:
http://www.nottinghamcityhomes.org.uk/find-a-home/home-of-the-week/keverne-close/
[4] NCH’s recently produced Hospital to Home Summary Evaluation Report with more details of this project is available on request.