Agenda item

The New Accommodation for Independent Living (NAIL) project is the largest and most strategically important efficiency and quality improvement initiative within the Adult Social Care Department. The programme aims to identify, develop and acquire alternative forms of care to residential care for all vulnerable adult client groups in Brent. This report updates members of the committee on the NAIL project. 

A report updating the committee on the New Accommodation for Independent Living (NAIL) project was introduced by Helen Woodland (Operational Director Social Care). The NAIL project was the largest and most strategically important efficiency and quality improvement initiative within the Adult Social Care Department. The programme aimed to identify, develop and acquire alternative forms of care to residential care for all vulnerable adult client groups in Brent. It was explained that outcomes for people going into residential care were not as good as for those who remained in their own communities and the NAIL project sought to address this by supporting people in an independent living setting, allowing them to remain in a home of their own, or in their own communities. It was emphasised that Independent living was not a prescriptive model of service design and could look very different for different people with different levels of care and support needs. The project had been active for two years and the report before the committee outlined areas of learning, detailed mitigating actions taken and progress achieved.

In the subsequent discussion members questioned why those with mental health difficulties were not listed in the customer groups set out in Appendix A to the report. Further details were sought regarding the different models of supported living and how they correlated with different levels of need. A member expressed sadness at the difficulties which had prevented several sites from being developed and noting that one unit had been targeted at young people, queried whether consideration had been given to prioritising schemes for young people. The committee queried what work was being done with Brent Housing Partnership (BHP) to provide appropriate sites. 

Helen Woodland explained that the Mental Health client group should have been included in the table, noting that at 233 residents it comprised one of the larger groups. Phil Porter (Strategic Director for Community and Wellbeing) advised that a big challenge for this group was that housing need should be seen as pathway and while successes could be achieved in supported living settings, there remained difficulties in securing long term stable tenancies in the community. This had been reflected in the Mental Health Transformation programme which had gone live in January 2016 and sought to encompass the full spectrum of need and identify support pathways. It was considered particularly absurd that someone in a supported living unit would no longer have priority for social housing. A dedicated housing officer was now in place and it was hoped that some of these challenges could be addressed as a result of this closer working relationship. 

Helen Woodland outlined models of supported living explaining that these varied from small units providing a high level of support to larger units where a sense of community was an important factor. The former model was considered more appropriate for those with learning disabilities and the latter for older people. The level of need of the mental health client group varied and therefore a mixture of provision was appropriate. Thus far the council had been more successful at creating provision for younger people. Phil Porter advised that two sites in development belonged to BHP. There was a need to be more proactive in securing and developing the supported living units going forward and discussions around finance were in progress.

RESOLVED:

    (i)        that a review of the New Accommodation for Independent Living (NIAL) project be presented to the Committee in a year’s time detailing lessons learnt and actions required for further progression;

  (ii)        that work be undertaken to explore issues of affordability for those moving into the units, including the impact of taking up employment and more broadly, difficulties caused for those who do not receive a suitable supported offer.