Housing Adaptations: Options for Change and Improvement - An Analysis of Consultation Responses

8 Summary and conclusions

Summary

8.1 This report provides an analysis of responses to the independent Adaptations Working Group’s consultation on options for change and improvement to the future organisation and funding of adaptations for older people and disabled people. The consultation was based around ten key questions. The majority of responses to the consultation questionnaire were from organisations who either deliver or support the delivery of adaptations - therefore the views within this document are heavily weighted towards these groups. Likewise, there were few responses from organisations within the health and social care sector. Feedback from service users was obtained through three consultation events,

8.2 The consultation process was welcomed by respondents, who were primarily those involved in the delivery or supporting the delivery of adaptations. All of the respondents were of the view that there were some issues with the current system. Overall, the feedback regarding the changes suggested was positive - over 70% of respondents to the questionnaire felt that the correct issues were identified and there was majority support for nearly all of the streamlining changes supported, although most felt that these streamlined changes would not be sufficient to address all of the issues. There was also overwhelming agreement amongst the service users consulted through the regional events that changes are needed to the systems for delivering adaptations.

8.3 With regards to the approaches to the organisational responsibility and funding for housing adaptations, responses were mixed, as set out below. The local authority approach was most popular for both organisational and funding responsibility.

8.4 There were a number of positives and negatives highlighted for each approach. Reasons for favouring the local authority approach included that it would be one of the easier options to implement given their structures and experience of dealing with funding streams as well as their links to the wider strategic housing agenda and housing skills. However, there is also a danger that adaptations budgets and issues may ‘get lost’ within the variety of services provided by local authorities.

8.5 Similar issues were raised regarding the responsibility being passed to health and social care partnerships. This approach may enable a holistic approach to assessing the health and care needs of the individual and that as adaptations were health related services, it was right that they should be funded through health and social care streams. However, drawbacks to this option were highlighted, stating that it would be difficult to absorb adaptations into the sector at a time of significant change.

8.6 Finally, the greatest number of issues were highlighted in relation to the individual approach, however this approach was seen to fit most closely with current policy agendas (e.g. personalisation and self-directed support) in terms of meeting the needs of the individuals. However, the service users consulted via the regional consultation events, however, were in favour of the individual option for the delivery of adaptations. Service users also emphasised the need for high quality, independent support to make this work as well as increased choice and control for the individual and sufficient funding.

8.7 This report provides an analysis and collation of the overall themes and trends emerging from a review of all of the responses to the consultation. Due to the profile of the respondents to this consultation, it needs to be recognised that the views within this document are heavily weighted towards organisations who either deliver or support the delivery of housing adaptations.