Agenda item

Emergency Support Scheme

A report from the Director of Finance, Resources and Customer Services is attached. This summarises the results of the consultation exercise and recommends a new Emergency Support Scheme. (Key decision – reference number 3657)

(Report No.176)

(8.30 – 8.35 pm)

Minutes:

Councillor Andrew Stafford (Cabinet Member for Finance and Property) introduced the report of the Director of Finance, Resources and Customer Services (No.176) summarising the results of the consultation exercise and recommending a new Emergency Support Scheme.

 

NOTED

 

1.         that an amendment sheet was circulated at the meeting, the details of which are set out below. The amendments were minor and did not alter the fundamentals of the scheme:

 

Paragraph

Amendment or clarification

3.3.

To total expenditure in 2011/12 should read £1,056,600

3.4

£192,432 has been set aside for administration only.  With the Council facing significant funding reductions, it cannot augment government funding for the scheme.  It is unclear whether funding will continue.  The level of administration costs incurred by the Council will be reviewed after the first year of operation

4.1

The consultation took place between January and February 2013

4.2

The figures given show the percentage of responses that were positive or neutral to the statements proposed in the consultation document

4.4

The proposals relating to cash payments were set out in the consultation document

5.2

Other schemes referred to in Appendix A would be referred to as an alternative to the Emergency Support Scheme

5.4

P-card – is a council payments card

5.6 and 5.7

Those taking up residency in the next six weeks following a period in an institution or residential care (rather than the month as stated in the report)

5.6 and 5.7

Where a person has savings which doesn’t cover their whole needs, the Council will consider applications proportionate to the residue of applicant’s need after their savings have been exhausted

5.6 and 5.7

The scheme will be publicised through the Council’s website, residents magazine, leaflets and promoted to local voluntary organisations

5.6 and 5.7

Once an applicant has met the eligibility criteria, their application may need to be considered in relation to its priority (see paragraph 5.8)

5.6 and 5.7

The Council is aware of the risk of loan sharks and would wish to encourage residents to avoid them as much as possible.

5.8

Vulnerable and protected groups and those with dependent children with score higher on risk and priority.  The application of the fund will be monitored monthly to ensure consistent application of the criteria and the categories of risk, levels of awards and scoring of risk will be reviewed in the light of experiences after the first year of operation. 

 

5.8

When considering amending the scheme, the Council will balance the financial risk with the risk of inconsistent treatment by restricting these in-year changes to only those that are clearly necessary and evidenced.

General

Numbering of paragraphs

8

Equalities Impact – the Department for Work and Pensions are unable to provide an equalities breakdown of existing claimants.  A more detailed picture will emerge as data is collected locally and this will be reviewed at the end of the first year

Appendix A

Only the Community Care Grants and Crisis loans are moving to the Council.  All other listed schemes remain the same.

 

2.         that the report was proposing a new emergency support scheme which would replace the Government’s community care grants and crisis loans which it was abolishing from 1 April 2013. The Council was proposing two parts to its emergency support scheme – emergency payments and local assistance grants;

 

3.         the existing emergency support payments/loans, Appendix A to the report, and, the statistics on claims for 2011/12, Appendix B to the report;

 

4.         the prioritisation proposals as set out in section 5.8 of the report and amended in the schedule above. Each eligible application would be graded as high, medium or low. The demand for funds would be monitored on a monthly basis. The Council had been allocated funding from Central Government for year one of the scheme, the funding allocation for the following year had not yet been confirmed. Members discussed the funding allocations and potential implications for the Council in relation to any overspend or underspend on the scheme;

 

5.         Councillor McGowan questioned the proposed prioritisation criteria and the actions that the Council could take in meeting the eligible applications within the limited funding available. He suggested that the Council should begin by meeting the high and medium priority applications only in the first instance until the level of demand became clear. A discussion took place on the advantages and disadvantages of applying the criteria in differing scenarios;

 

6.         Members discussed the funding which individuals could apply for through other Government legislation such as the National Assistance Act;

 

7.         that the Council was aware of the risk of loan sharks and would wish to encourage residents to avoid them as much as possible;

 

8.         the alternative options which had been considered and the reasons for the proposed scheme as set out in full in the report;

 

9.         that voluntary and community groups had been briefed on the new scheme together with relevant teams within the Council including Children’s Social Care and Community Safety. There was flexibility within the scheme for vulnerable people and if necessary fast-track decision making routes could be followed;

 

10.       that the scheme would be kept under review and closely monitored. The financial implications of the scheme would be included within the monthly revenue monitoring reports to Cabinet. Members also requested that they receive a verbal update on the scheme three months after the start of its implementation.

 

NOTE: Prior to taking the following decisions on the scheme, Members resolved to move into part 2 of the meeting in order to continue discussions, containing exempt information. The press and public were excluded, as detailed in Minute Nos. 20 and 21 below. The minutes follow the order of the printed agenda. Following the discussion, the meeting reverted to part one.

 

Alternative Options Considered: NOTED that a range of alternative options had been considered as set out in full in the report.

 

DECISION: The Cabinet agreed

 

1.         the new discretionary Emergency Support Scheme as set out in section 5 of the report;

 

2.         to delegate authority to the Cabinet Member for Finance and Property and the Director of Finance, Resources and Customer Services to agree contractual arrangements with suppliers;

 

3.         to delegate authority to the Cabinet Member for Finance and Property and the Director of Finance, Resources and Customer Services to agree prioritisation set out in section 5.8 of the report;

 

4.         to delegate authority to the Director of Finance, Resources and Customer Services, in liaison with the Cabinet Member for Finance and Property, to agree minor amendments to the scheme.

 

Reason: The proposed scheme intended to achieve the following aims whilst managing risk within reduced government funding:

  • Prevent imminent and serious risk to the health or safety of the borough’s most financially excluded residents.
  • Ease severe financial pressure in families facing crisis
  • Help build stronger communities through supporting people to establish themselves in the community after unsettled living or institutional care
  • Build financial capability, independence and resilience

(Key decision – reference number 3657)

Supporting documents: