NHF voices ‘serious concerns’ in response to supported housing consultation

“However, we have serious concerns that if these new measures are implemented as proposed, they risk unintended consequences by placing an unsustainable financial burden on the good-quality providers of supported housing who are already operating on extremely low financial margins after many years of funding cuts to supported housing.”

One key concern, which was also raised by Lee Buss-Blair, director of care and support at Riverside housing association, is over which party is deemed to be a licensee responsible for ensuring standards in a scheme.

Mr Buss-Blair pointed out that where third parties are operating supported housing in properties belonging to housing associations, the registered provider could be put into the position of “quasi-regulator”, adding to its duties and forcing it to employ specialist staff. This would be despite the likelihood that the commissioner of the supported housing is a local authority rather than the housing association.

“The proposals for who is the licensee present significant risk for any registered provider that has a managing agent support provider operating from their properties, and may lead to a significant reduction in landlords providing supported housing in this way. There should be more flexibility around who should be the licensee,” said the NHF response.

The NHF document, which was based on feedback from members, also said there must be no “burdensome” duplication of regulation, given supported housing already comes under the scope of a range of parties, including the Regulator of Social Housing, Ofsted and the Care Quality Commission.

“Information-sharing between local authorities and existing regulators will increase the efficiency of enforcement. There should be passporting through areas where reporting is already required,” the response said.

The NHF added that the government’s approach to implementing the act, which received royal assent in 2023, must take a “risk-based approach” focused on those parts of the supported housing sector that have been attractive to rogue providers because they enable high rents to be charged.

“There should be an exemption for older person’s housing, because no concerns have been identified in this part of the sector and its rents are low, while it provides a preventative service that keeps people in their homes and out of hospital or residential care that come with higher costs,” it said.

The NHF’s position statement said there should not be a new planning use class for supported housing, which it argued could further slow applications for schemes down. It also called for more effective administration of housing benefit, and said further definitions of care, support and supervision for benefit purposes were unnecessary and “do not acknowledge the fluctuating nature of support needs”.

Besides the direct responses to the consultation proposals, the NHF urged the government to “urgently review” funding for supported housing – which used to be ringfenced under the pre-2010 Supporting People programme. It should develop a clear “cross-government approach to protect and grow this vital part of the housing system”, the NHF said. 

The document said at least £1.6bn should be allocated annually to English local authorities for commissioning supported housing, mirroring Supporting People. It added that the government should set targets to ensure need is met, and increase rent flexibility in the sector.

“In the last year, nearly one in three supported housing providers have been forced to close schemes because of these cuts along with rising costs,” Mr Smyth said.

“Unamended, [the government’s] proposals risk making this crisis worse, by introducing a blanket approach to dealing with a minority of rogue providers.

“A longer-term and ambitious strategy, along with a commitment to funding, is needed to give both supported housing providers and residents confidence in the future of this vital service,” added Mr Smyth, who said the NHF was “ready to work with” the government.

“Without that and without pragmatic adjustments to avoid the unintended consequences of these proposals, there is a real risk of a further reduction in the provision of supported housing.”

Earlier in May, in response to Mr Buss-Blair’s comments, a spokesperson for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said it would “carefully consider all responses” to its consultation before implementing any reforms.