17th July 2014 - Institute of Revenues Rating and Valuationirrv.net/.../2014/07/2014_07_17/webinar_slides.pdf · 2016-04-25 · Southwark Vital Statistics • HB Caseload 38,000 including;

17th July 2014 Southwark Direct Payment

Demonstration Project

www.southwark.gov.uk 2

Demonstration project overview •  6 Demonstration LA’s across the UK

–  England - Southwark, Wakefield, Oxford and Shropshire –  Torfaen – Wales & Edinburgh – Scotland –  3 LA landlords and 9 Housing Associations/providers

•  Paying HB direct with an arrears trigger –  Tenants switched in and out of DP on an 8 week trigger then

4+4. 4 week trigger during 6 months extension

•  Who we selected –  1,474 Southwark council residents –  525 Family Mosaic residents

•  Potential to inform and influence: –  Universal Credit design to help our customers –  Voluntary and 3rd sector support agencies

2

www.southwark.gov.uk

Southwark Vital Statistics

•  HB Caseload 38,000 including; –  23,000 council tenants - paid direct to their rent account –  10,000 RSL tenants - 95% being paid direct to the Landlord –  5,000 Private

•  Council Tax households 131,000 –  CTRS 23,000 of which 19,000 paying for first time (Apr 13)

•  Benefit Cap ~ 222 cases, commenced August 2013 –  Average weekly loss £65.25

•  Under-occupancy ~ 3,700 –  Average weekly loss £19.89

3


Risk profile of Southwark DP tenants •  All tenants were asked to complete a risk

‘self-assessment’ questionnaire –  90% responded

•  Mapped against UC Tier 1 / 2 risk factors –  36% had a Tier 1 risk factor

•  implying significant support needs and an alternative payment arrangement (APA)

Learn: those with Tier 1 or multiple risk factors were less successful at maintaining payment than others

–  41% had a Tier 2 risk factor (& no Tier 1) •  Implying some support needs and possible APA

–  23% reported no significant risk factors Learn: there was evidence of under

reporting particularly around debt

4

No Bank account 5%Learning difficulties 6%Medical/mental issues 15%Difficulty reading/writing 8%Not english speaker 6%Addiction history 3%Risk of domestic violence 1%Severe debt/deductions 7%Undischarged Bankrupt 0%Unable to open bank acct 3%Rent arrears/eviction history 10%Recently out of prison 1%History of homelessness 3%Recently out of Services 0%Currently receiving support 6%


Approach to support •  All tenants offered opportunity to receive advice before going onto DP

–  Advice Days with Housing, Benefits, VCS partners, Banks/CU •  Less than 5% take-up; Those who attended found it very useful!

•  Tenants that got into arrears on DP were all referred to relevant agencies for support

–  80% declined support –  No takers to try ‘jamjar’ accounts –  Some ‘difficult’ cases managed DP with support

Support during the extension period •  Tenancy Support Officers (TSO) – Supported Income Officers

–  intervened when a payment was missed before switch back –  offered support and investigated other underlying issues

•  tenants were found to have more debt than had previously been stated •  in some instances the TSO intervention resulted in additional arrears payments being

made!

5


Vulnerability •  Initially vulnerability difficult to identify

–  in terms of people who would struggle •  Levels of vulnerability easily identified through data sharing

–  Less easy to identify ability to pay / budget •  Welfare reform further distorted the picture

–  Full impact yet to be realised –  DHP and Hardship payment ‘masking’ the issue

•  The demonstrator project created some levels of vulnerability not expected –  People mis-handling direct debits –  Unsure of how to budget

Learning is that any risk assessment must be evidence based

6


Collection •  Levels of payments by tenants across the project

sites varied from 89% to 97%. –  This reflected in part the range of intervention and different

switchback triggers being tested; the average rent collection rate across the project sites stood at 94%.

•  LBS is the largest social landlord in London; DP collection is equivalent to a £10M shortfall to LBS –  Estimates additional admin cost LBS Housing and R & B

£1.2M pa –  significant increase in bad debt provision

7

As at payment 12 (June 2013)

Overall FM LBS

DP Collection rate 91% 95% 89% Wider/non-DP collection rate - 100% 98.9%


Main highlights •  35% of Southwark project tenants did not receive DP for

various reasons including not engaging when support was offered

•  Tenants on DP dropped from a peak of 58% in December 2012 to 41% at the end of the project in December 2013 –  We had not reached a sustainable level of DP

•  22% of those on DP were switched back to landlord payment –  Learning is that switchback process revealed more support needs

where people found themselves struggling to manage •  10% of tenants did not engage even after 7 letters, texts and..!

–  Risk – will they successfully claim UC? Financial impact on LA if not •  Just over 80% of customers in the DP project were affected by

the welfare reforms

8


Key challenges for Southwark •  Rent collection down and admin costs up

–  How will the extra costs be funded? •  additional administration costs for the LA, significant investment to upgrade IT systems

and re-skill staff to support direct payment

•  Not clear how UC will manage the switchback process –  Automated links to UC would make the process workable

•  Data sharing!! –  Key learning from DPDPs is that the close relationship between Landlord and LA

is vital to good process operation –  If it will be a single trigger equivalent of 2 months’ rent arrears

•  Danger!! this would allow people to underpay persistently over long periods

–  Early feedback from the pilot sites suggests process redesign is needed •  Effective delivery of support, with an outcome that reduces arrears

–  Levels of support in project are not scalable to BAU –  Who carries the risk of failed support?

9


UC Planning assumptions & considerations •  Organisation

–  Income Office vs. TSO (do IOs have the skills to influence / educate tenants?) –  Single message at any point / consistency (Local partner support including

JCP) –  Skills for managing rent collection and arrears management

•  Process –  Collection and escalation policies –  Refresh tenant data periodically –  Communication to customers

•  optimise early intervention processes and explore effective ways to communicate

–  Consider UC payment cycle to rent payment cycle •  How to handle 4 weeks in arrears / month in arrears payments

•  Technology –  IT’s role in managing cases –  Increase in systems involvement and resources (learning from DP) –  Mobile technology / texting / automated functionality and monitoring

10


And so for LSSF...

•  Evidence is that most people will need at least some help in UC transition

•  Big issue for Southwark –  Housing Stock – higher collection costs / less rent –  Citizens – increase in personal indebtedness

11


Overview •  UC implementation timetable

–  Summer ’14 extend Pathfinder to couples / Autumn ’14 to families –  LSSF (published 6 Dec 2013) now formally part of the UC programme –  DWP/JCP are ‘actively’ encouraging LA’s to work in partnership for

commissioning services –  ‘Test and Trial’ proposed

•  Webinar after Easter •  Expressions of Interest and selections made June 2014 •  Commence test and trial September for 1 year programme

•  Ministers want to ensure the LSSF will –  Ensure people are supported to make the transition to UC –  Support those who will find the transition ‘difficult’

•  LSSF will look to support and provide –  Existing / New services (specific to the migration / implementation of UC) –  Triage and Orientation –  Online Access – ‘Digital Where Appropriate’ –  Financial Products Provision and Budgeting/debt advice –  Welfare Benefit and Advice

12


Current thinking •  To establish a tri-borough (3-B) / JCP partnership agreement and

measurement framework delivering; –  A One Touch / Tell Us Once service - Joined up approach to create a “single

claimant journey” for claimants with complex needs, identifying cases for exception payments

•  Same service regardless of entry point •  Tri-borough opportunity as part of Community Budget project

•  To develop a triage process that maximises the chance of: –  Identifying a customer’s UC transition support needs –  Achieving successful referral pathways

•  To commission and deliver support services –  Including at least one new shared service delivered centrally and one delivered by

multiple providers –  To gather evidence to support assumptions in cost model –  To learn where and how customers can be encouraged to prepare ahead of UC

implementation

13


Southwark LSSF Vision

14

“Southwark residents in need of support will receive the best possible support to get them into work or to increase their independence if not able to work”


•  Complex with support worker – SW as case manager •  Complex no support worker – triage team case manager •  Medium – individual support appointments, work coach will

manage •  Low – make appointments /signposting, work coach will manage

15

F2F

Web

Tel

Issues / T1/2 /

APA

Entry channel

Triage process

Pathway Interventions

Complex with SW Complex no SW

Medium

Low

Support

Support

Support

Support

Support


Contact Karen Michael Service Development Team Leader [email protected] 020 7525 4867 07507 470344

Documents

17th July 2014 - Institute of Revenues Rating and Valuationirrv.net/.../2014/07/2014_07_17/webinar_slides.pdf · 2016-04-25 · Southwark Vital Statistics • HB Caseload 38,000 including;