The Chair introduced this item
on the Older People’s Housing and Care Project which he
reminded members, had been discussed at Cabinet on 14 February
2018.
Lia Markwick (Service
Development & Strategic Commissioning Manager) and Jemma Gumble
(Strategic Partnerships Development Manager) gave a presentation on
this subject.
A video was screened which gave
an example of a successful new development that follows a new
approach for older people with the co-location of specialist
housing and community services around a ‘vibrant service
hub’ for residents.
The following points were
highlighted:
- There
are demographical challenges for Enfield with the number of people
over 65 years forecast to increase 23% over the next 10
years.
People are living longer although often in poor
health.
- Other
challenges include the pressures on housing supply and on health
and social care budgets which indicate new approaches
are needed in respect of the provision
of ‘assisted living’. However there are often negative
perceptions of Housing with Care for older residents.
- There
are currently over 500 older people receiving intensive care
packages in their own home. This number is increasing and there is
a need for growth in various retirement housing and extra care
housing. New choices for older people are required.
- One
way to extend the choice for older residents is to co-locate
specialist housing with community services which includes health
and wellbeing and might also include co-location with education/
learning/ leisure and retail facilities. All of this to be centred around a vibrant
‘hub’ where residents and the wider community would
interact.
- Contrary to some criticisms that older people would be centred
in a ‘bubble’ the development would have an outward
facing hub with the community. With the aim to promote healthy,
active ageing.
- Feasibility studies are to be undertaken to look at
options. A development at Milton Keynes
which provides facilities similar to those which we may wish to
offer provides properties to buy or to rent.
- Advantages of having the co-location of housing and health
services would mean that residents can be cared for at home rather
than in hospital. The building quality would be high and more
suited to the complex needs of older people. Other benefits
expected include the reduction in temporary accommodation costs due
to the subsequent increased supply of local housing. Improvements for residents from an increase in
their wellbeing, a reduction in loneliness, and improved dementia
outcomes, there should also be a reduced risk of falls and a
greater chance of couples being able to stay together.
- The
current vision is to have a single development for approximately
200 to 300 homes. Financing may be possible through partnership
funding such as NHS contributions, Mayors funds, charitable trust
funds, and HRA contributions.
The following points were
made:
- Cabinet had authorised officers to progress the strategic
planning of an Older People’s Housing and Care
Project. Feasibility studies are to be
undertaken.
- Councillor Smith said he had worked for a Housing Association
and had experience in this field. He stressed the importance of
ensuring that we establish the demand for this facility and whether
older people wanted to live there. He
said, it should be remembered that there was not the demand for
sheltered housing properties in the borough, which have been
demolished and thought this could be seen as a warning for future
developments of this kind. He suggested that a private developer be
brought in to take this project forward which would minimise the
risks to the local authority.
- Councillor Levy said he understands a feasibility study would be
done and risk analysis undertaken.
- Councillor Smith went on to say there is an assumption that
people brought together because they are old and frail wish to be
together. He also suggested that we may wish to consider whether
there is value in having this facility in Enfield or should it be
undertaken in partnership with another local authority such as with
Hertfordshire.
- Councillor Rye suggested that the concept of expecting old
people to wish to live together may be wrong. Generally people of
different ages live together in a road, and communities are built
amongst a young and vibrant population. It is essential to see what
the demand would be for the proposal, he thought in Enfield many
older people on retirement would tend to sell their properties and
move out to other areas.
- Councillor Smith thought that there would be some people who
would wish to live in a development such as that proposed, however,
he thought it was important that a private developer be used who is
experienced in this field and who would make this a less risky
venture for Enfield.
- Members commented on the large number of care homes already in
the borough and the fact that other boroughs place their residents
in Enfield.
- It was
asked whether the usual criteria would apply for Enfield residents
regarding nomination rights. It was thought there may be interest
from other boroughs and it would not have to be exclusively for
Enfield residents, but Enfield residents will come
first.
- Councillor Levy stressed the need for the feasibility studies to
include qualitative as well as quantitative
assessments.
- Doug
Wilson spoke of the benefits of older people having choices which
this proposal would provide. He spoke of the challenges that
residential care homes sometimes have regarding nursing care
provision. He thought extra care (nursing) provision may make a
difference for people considering where they would like to live. It
may also help to prevent social isolation. Friendship groups would
hopefully grow and help in building proper communities
here.
- Cllr
Levy raised a number of questions –
a.
If officers had an approximate idea of costs
involved?
b.
If there were any sites we may consider suitable in
the borough at present?
c.
What is the timetable for the project, - when would
it be completed?
d.
Is there a possibility that a ‘do
nothing’ option could emerge from the feasibility
study? -
the following
answers were given
a.
In Norfolk a similar project with 172 units cost
approximately £18.9m. (it was acknowledged that land in
Norfolk would be cheaper than in Enfield)
b.
It is too early to be able to determine any future
site locations.
c.
It is anticipated that the project would be
completed in 3 to 4 years’ time.
d.
The project indicated is the optimal idea, however,
if space or finance does not allow this, then perhaps a smaller
plan could be considered.
- It was
thought that in order to achieve the diverse facilities suggested
including education and retail services then an early dialogue with
partners may be useful.
It was pointed out that a
facility offering housing with care for people adds a further
choice to the spectrum of options currently available for older
people.
The Chair thanked Jemma Gumble,
Lia Markwick and Doug Wilson for their report.