Report of the Director of Housing Operations

This report is an update on the Homelessness Service and the improvement and transformation that is happening across the service in an increasingly challenging social and economic context.  The Council’s Homelessness Transformation Programme (A Place Called Home) is focussed on

• Significantly increase the successful prevention of homelessness
• Continue our progress to end rough sleeping
• Considerably reduce the use of temporary accommodation
• Deliver Better Outcomes and Better Lives for people and families at risk or who are homeless

The Committee considered the report of the Director of Housing Operations which provided an update on the Homelessness Service and the improvement and transformation that was happening across the service in an increasingly challenging social and economic context.

Key points and themes in the report included:

• Preventing homelessness;
• Work to end rough sleeping;
• Work to considerably reduce the use of temporary accommodation; and
• Delivering better outcomes and better lives for people and families at risk or who were homeless.

Some of the key points that arose from the Committee’s discussions were: -

• Recognising the challenges that the city was facing and thanking officers for the work that was taking place to make improvements, including welcoming the focus on preventing homelessness;
• Noting that additional officers had been assigned to answer calls to the Housing Solutions Service, was it possible to increase this further, given that the target for the service was to be answering 85% of calls by the end of March 2023;
• What did Manchester need from the national government to address the homelessness problem;
• Emergency accommodation for rough sleepers with dogs;
• To request a further update report early in the next municipal year, including data on the use of temporary accommodation and its geographical spread, noting the benefits of people being able to remain near their community networks;
• Would the 200 units of self-contained dispersed accommodation be located within Manchester and noting that these were for families, not single homeless people;
• Did the Council have any property which it could convert into temporary accommodation; and
• The impact on children of living in temporary accommodation away from their community support network.

The Chair of the Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee questioned whether the rent amounts in appendix 3 reflected the current situation as, she advised, landlords were increasing rents after evicting tenants.  She stated that the time taken to move new tenants into social rented housing after the previous tenants had left was too long.  She expressed concern at the costs of bed-and-breakfast accommodation and stated that cheaper alternatives should be considered.  She questioned why Camden’s figures for households in temporary accommodation were so much lower than Manchester’s.  She questioned whether community connection could be taken into account when allocating social housing and whether more could be done to incentivise families to allow their adult children to live with them.

In response to a Member’s question, the Assistant Director of Homelessness reported that the count of rough sleepers was city-wide and included the airport.  He agreed with a Member’s comment that answering 85% of calls was still not good enough but advised that improvements were being made incrementally, that significant progress had already been made in the number of calls being answered and that the service would continue to work to improve this further. 

The Strategic Lead for Homelessness invited Members to contact her if they wanted to join one of the counts of rough sleepers.  She reported that work was taking place to encourage people to access the Housing Solutions Service digitally to increase capacity and make the service more easily accessible, while recognising that many people preferred to contact the service by telephone.  She reported that her service worked with the Dogs Trust and that there were hostels in the city which were very dog-friendly and others which would consider accepting pets on a case-by-case basis.  In response to a question about right-sizing, she advised that her service could assist people who were in properties which were too large for them to find a suitable-sized property and provide other incentives, such as helping an older person with packing and moving or carpeting or decorating the new property.

In response to a question about case checks, the Assistant Director of Homelessness outlined how, over a ten-week period, service managers would come to have a firm understanding of all live homeless application cases. 

In response to a Member’s question, the Strategic Lead (Housing) provided an overview of the work to build more affordable homes in the city. 

The Deputy Leader reported that more investment was needed from national government to build affordable housing, including social rented housing, at the scale that was needed, although the Council was working hard with its partners to maximise what could be delivered.  She advised that the case needed to be made to the next national government about what big cities needed from them to address the housing crisis, and in the meantime, Members should continue to lobby on Section 21 evictions and the Local Housing Allowance.

In response to a Member’s question, the Assistant Director of Homelessness advised that the future plans for the ‘A Bed Every Night’ (ABEN) scheme and the Etrop Service were still being discussed.  He advised that the focus on families in relation to the 200 units was due to the legal position that bed-and-breakfast accommodation was never suitable for a family and could only be used in exceptional circumstances and then for no longer than six weeks, and also the negative impact that being in bed-and-breakfast accommodation had on children; however, he highlighted other work focused on single people which was detailed in the report.  He advised that the 200 units would be almost exclusively within Manchester although consideration could be given to locations on the borders of the city.  He advised that placing families in these 200 units would save the Council £7 million per year and provide them with decent accommodation.  He explained how Camden’s allocations policy encouraged people to contact the Council earlier which gave more time to find a solution for their housing issue and that this had informed the proposal for Manchester to change its allocations policy.  In response to a Member’s question, he advised that there was no timeframe for how long someone could be placed in temporary accommodation and that it was usually until a longer term accommodation offer could be found, which could be a number of years.  In response to a question about people who could not provide a guarantor, which was requested by some private landlords, he advised that the service considered each case on an individual basis and would negotiate with landlords to reach an equitable solution.

The Director of Housing Operations informed the Committee that his service was looking at 44 Council assets which could be considered for re-purposing as accommodation.  He outlined how homelessness prevention work would help keep people in their own communities with their support networks.  He advised that the number of void social rented properties had significantly reduced and was now less than 1.5% of housing stock.

The Chair asked whether the Committee had received a response to the letter sent to Michael Gove in November 2022 and, as they had not, requested that a further letter be sent, inviting him to Manchester to see the impact of the government’s policies in the city and to see the strengths of the people of Manchester and the great work that Council officers were doing.  She also thanked officers for their work.

Decisions

1.            To write to Michael Gove to invite him to visit Manchester.

2.            To receive a further report early in the next municipal year.