Supporting People Client Records. Executive Summary Annual Report

Centre for Housing Research (CHR) University of St Andrews Supporting People Client Records Executive Summary Annual Report 2005-2006 CHR SP Client Record Office The Observatory University of St Andrews Buchanan Gardens St Andrews Fife KY16 9LZ 1

Supporting People Client Records Executive Summary for Annual Report 2005-2006 Supporting People Client Records Annual Report 2005-2006 The third Annual Report from the Client Record Office has now been produced and it brings together information from Client Records completed for clients who started to receive services between 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006. The aim of the Annual Report is to provide summary commentary on the main findings from the Client Record dataset, together with illustrative tables and graphs. The report is based on 192,271 validated Client Record forms covering the 1st April 2005 to 31st March 2006. The Annual Report for 2005-2006 is divided into eight sections: Section one: Section two: Section three: Section four: Section five: Section six: Section seven: Section eight: Introduction An overview of client characteristics for both primary and secondary client groups. A description of the previous accommodation of clients prior to receiving services. The types of Supporting People providers and services delivered to clients together with the routes client groups took in accessing service provision during the reporting year. The extent of cross-authority provision during the third year of Supporting People. Clients who were statutorily homeless and owed a main homelessness duty and the services they received. A summary of clients who require services under other statutory frameworks. Comparative analysis of data collected over April 03-March 04, April 04-March 05 and April 05-March 06 including a specific focus on regional variations of Black African clients. The full Annual Report can be accessed by visiting the Client Records website at www.spclientrecord.org.uk This executive summary offers a brief overview of the Annual Report. It provides a summary of top-level findings from the third year of Client Record reporting. The Centre for Housing Research (CHR), based at the University of St Andrews, is responsible for the management, organisation and analysis of Client Record forms, where all enquiries should be addressed. Tel: 01334 461765 Fax: 01334 463920 Email: sphelp@st-andrews.ac.uk 2

Centre for Housing Research (CHR) University of St Andrews Executive Summary Clients The report is based on 192,271 completed Client Record forms covering the period April 2005 March 2006 that were validated by 30th August 2006. The Client Record System collects information on twenty-one primary client group categories. Six of these categories account for 72% of clients. Single homeless people with support needs were the most frequently recorded client group accounting for almost a third of all clients. The next largest groups were, in decreasing order: women at risk of domestic violence, people with mental health problems, homeless families in need of support, young people at risk and people with generic needs. More male (52%) clients were recorded than female. The largest proportion of clients were in the age group of 18-24 years. Almost a third of clients were claiming job seekers allowance. Just over one-quarter of clients had been accepted as statutorily homeless and owed a main homelessness duty. The most common previous accommodation category for clients was general needs local authority housing. Voluntary agencies provided almost twofifths of services to clients. The most common support service provided was supported housing. The most frequent referral route for clients was self-referral. Well over four-fifths of clients received services within their own local authority area. The North West (16%) and London (15%) each had larger numbers of clients compared to other regions. For example the client base of the North East made up only 5% of those recorded by Client Records. The East of England had the largest proportion of single homeless people with support needs (37%). The second largest primary client group varied regionally with many regions recording either women at risk of domestic violence or mental health problems. The West Midlands recorded generic needs as the second largest primary category and the North West recorded approximately equal proportions of young people at risk and homeless families. The proportion of people with mental health problems was greater in London (12%), and the Southern regions (South West, 11%; South East, 11%) compared to 9% nationally. The North West (12%), East of England (11%) and London (10%) had larger proportions of homeless families with support needs compared to the national average of 8%. The West Midlands had the smallest proportion of homeless families (5%). There were, proportionally, more young people at risk in the North West (12%) than in any other region and the national figure was 8%. Ethnic origins White-British represented the ethnic origin for the majority of support users (76%). Ethnic minority clients tended to be younger than clients of White-British origins. Two-fifths of mixed-caribbean clients fell into the 18-24 age bracket, compared to 28% of White-British clients. One-fifth of mixed-caribbean and one-fifth of Chinese clients were between the ages of 16 and 17 compared to 12% of White-British clients. 3

Supporting People Client Records Executive Summary for Annual Report 2005-2006 Indeed, there were smaller proportions of ethnic minority clients in the primary groups that capture older people than would normally be expected. Compared to the national average of 20% of ethnic minority clients, only 15% of older people with support needs, 13% of frail elderly and 8% of older people with mental health problems were ethnic minority clients. Secondary client groups Out of the 192,271 clients recorded, approximately half (98,662) were defined by one or more secondary descriptions in addition to a primary description. Whilst 56,456 clients were recorded primarily as single homeless people with support needs, an additional 20,379 clients had single homeless with support needs as their secondary client group. Within the secondary client groupings there were 13,706 clients who were experiencing mental health problems. Combined with clients within the primary category of people with mental health problems (17,517) this figure is almost doubled bringing the total number of SP funded clients with mental health problems to 31,223. Previous Accommodation General needs local authority housing, living with family, sleeping rough, staying with friends and supported housing described the living conditions of over half of clients prior to receiving Supporting People services. People with generic needs (20%), women at risk of domestic violence (19%) and people with mental health problems (15%) made up the majority of clients who were general needs local authority tenants prior to receiving Supporting People services. Clients who were recorded as living with family prior to receiving services were most likely to be single homeless people with support needs (36%), young people at risk (16%) and homeless families in need of support (12%). As clients began to receive services, almost all moved on from living with their family. Almost three-quarters of people sleeping rough prior to uptake of services were defined as single homeless people with support needs (49%) and rough sleepers (25%). Single homeless people with support needs (52%), young people at risk (13%) and homeless families (7%) accounted for the majority of clients staying with friends prior to receiving services. The majority of clients leaving their prior supported housing accommodation were provided with supported housing elsewhere (64%). In total, 5% of clients were temporarily housed in bed and breakfast. Together, single homeless people with support needs (37%) and homeless families (22%) stand out as being the clients most likely to be in bed and breakfast accommodation prior to receiving a Supporting People service. After qualifying for Supporting People services, the majority (91%) of clients did not remain in bed and breakfast accommodation. However, 14% of clients took up places in other temporary direct access hostel accommodation. The Client Record System recorded 5,718 clients who were owner-occupiers prior to receiving Supporting People services, 3% of all clients. Women at risk of domestic violence were far more likely to have been owner-occupiers (35%) than any other primary client group prior to receiving a Supporting People support service. Service provision and referral routes Three principal categories of support supported housing (35%), floating support (34%) and direct access (17%) made up over four-fifths of service provision during this third year of the Supporting People programme. Floating support services were provided to just over two-fifths of female clients while 4

Centre for Housing Research (CHR) University of St Andrews only 27% of male clients received this form of support. However, two-fifths of males were accepted into supported housing schemes, compared to only 29% of females. Also, 25% of males accessed direct access accommodation compared to 9% of females. Almost two-fifths of all Supporting People services were provided by voluntary organisations, 28% of which was temporary accommodation in direct access hostels. Floating support services accounted for more than a quarter and direct access 8% of housing association/rsls service provision. One-quarter of services provided by housing authorities was supported housing and almost one-fifth was direct access. Very nearly a quarter of clients accessed services by means of self-referral. Local authority housing departments referred one-fifth of clients and over a tenth of clients were referred by voluntary agencies. Social Services referred 8% of clients to Supporting People services, 37% of which were to housing associations/rsls and a further 35% to voluntary organisations. In the West Midlands (39%), North East (39%), East Midlands (38%) and South East (35%), floating support services as opposed to supported housing, were the services supporting the greatest number of clients. Voluntary organisations dominated service provision in Yorkshire & the Humber (48%), the North East (45%), and West Midlands (44%) and the North West (36%), while housing associations/rsls provided a greater than average proportion of services in the South East (48%), the East of England (42%) and the South West (39%). The national average was 35%. The largest category of referral in London and the North East was local authority housing department referral (27% and 22% respectively) while in all other regions the largest referral route was through self-referral. Cross-authority provision Overall, more than four-fifths of referrals were made for clients who made an application for Supporting People services within their own local authority area. Less than a fifth (13%) of clients accessed services outside their immediate local authority area. By far, the most common type of non-host referral was open access. Almost one quarter of referrals accepted by voluntary organisations were non-host referrals. Proportionally, this compares to 12% of housing association/rsl acceptances and only 2% of housing authority acceptances. Compared to the national average of 13% for non-host referrals, London had the highest proportion of this type of referral (20%). The East Midlands and Yorkshire & the Humber had the lowest levels of non-host referrals (each with 8%). While London had the highest level of non-host open-access referrals (16%), Yorkshire & the Humber (5%) and the East Midlands (5%) had the lowest. Clients are more likely to access services across Administering Authorities within the same region, than they are to cross regional boundaries. This pattern is most evident in London, given the greater numbers of Administering Authorities within that region. London was by far and away the largest net exporter in that, for every two people who came into the region for services, three people left the region, and London was the only region to record a net export of over 500 SP clients. Yorkshire and the Humber, the East Midlands and the South East were also net exporters but to a lesser extent. 5

Supporting People Client Records Executive Summary for Annual Report 2005-2006 The South West recorded the highest levels of import with more than twice as many clients coming into the region as leaving. The West Midlands, the East Region, and the North East were also net importers: for every three people who came into that region to receive services only two people left the region. The South West was the only region to record a net import of over 500 SP clients while the West Midlands and the East Region each recorded a net import of over 300 SP clients. Single homeless people and women at risk of domestic violence were the two most common non-host primary client groups across all the English regions in 2005/06. Together they accounted for 62% of all non- Host referrals. Homelessness Just over one-quarter of clients recorded by the Client Record System were accepted as statutorily homeless and owed a main homelessness duty. Single homeless people with support needs constituted more than a third of all clients accepted as statutorily homeless and owed a main homelessness duty. Slightly more than one-fifth of statutorily homeless clients were homeless families with support needs and women at risk of domestic violence made up a further 13%. Combined, living with family (20%), staying with friends (11%), other temporary accommodation (9%), sleeping rough (9%), bed & breakfast (9%) or in direct access hostels (8%) described the living conditions of statutorily homeless clients immediately prior to receiving Supporting People services. There were distinct regional variations in the proportions of statutorily homeless clients across England. London (30%) had a proportion of statutorily homeless clients that was above the national average (26%). In contrast, the East Midlands (19%) and South West (19%) had substantially lower proportions of clients who were statutorily homeless. Statutory frameworks In total, 48% of young people leaving care and 41% of people with learning disabilities were supported via Care Management (Social Services). Four principal client groups offenders/ those at risk of offending (32%), single homeless people with support needs (30%), people with drug problems (14%) and young people at risk (7%) made up over four-fifths of clients subject to Probation or Youth Offending Team supervision. Slightly more than two-fifths of people with mental health problems were receiving Care Programme Approach packages. Offenders/those at risk of offending (31%), single homeless people with support needs (20%), and people with mental health problems (17%) were the client groups that made up the majority of clients subject to Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements. London (12%) and the North East (10%) had the highest proportion of clients supported through Social Services Care Management. With an average for England of 8%, the East Midlands (5%) had the lowest proportion of clients supported through Care Management. There was divergence between regions for clients who were subject to Probation or Youth Offending Team supervision. While the average for England as a whole sat at 6%, 9% of clients in Yorkshire & the Humber and 9% in the North East were subject to supervision compared to only 3% of clients in London. 6

Centre for Housing Research (CHR) University of St Andrews Comparative analysis While some differences have occurred between 2003/04, 2004/05 and 2005/06, the overall picture emerging from data collection remains one of relatively stable proportions across and within the majority of categories identified on the Client Record Form. Notably, client group composition has remained constant with the majority of clients falling into one of the same six categories as previous years and the majority of clients being supported by the same three support and provider categories. Furthermore, access routes to Supporting People services are as they have been previously. While voluntary organisations continue to provide for the largest proportion of clients, services provided by housing associations have increased by 3% over the past 12 months. This corresponds with a 3% reduction in support provided by housing authorities. During 2004/5 a sizeable increase was recorded in the provision of floating support services compared to 2003/04. Since then, this trend has continued and currently amounts to a 6% increase in the percentage of clients supported through floating support between 2003/04 and 2005/06. The reverse is true for the percentage of clients accessing direct access hostels, which has dropped by 4% over the same period. The percentage of Statutorily homeless clients recorded has reduced year by year from 31% in 2003/04 to 26% in 2005/06. The decrease in the percentage of Statutorily homeless clients has occurred in all regions with the exception of the North West. The North West recorded a smaller proportion of Statutorily homeless clients in 2004/5 compared to 2003/04, however, with no further decrease over the past 12 months. In 2003/04, homeless families accounted for 18% of all statutory homeless acceptances. This figure increased by 3% in 2004/05 to 21% and over the past 12 months has remained at 21%. Host referrals have risen steadily since 2003/04 signalling a gradual reduction in the proportion of clients being referred across authorities. Black African clients accounted for the largest proportion of ethnic minority clients recorded, making up 5% (9,427) of all clients recorded by Client Records. The proportion of Black African clients recorded by Client Records within each region has remained relatively stable over time although the trend does appear to be on the decline. Compared to 2003/04, Black African clients in London decreased by 2% in 2005/06. The Client Record system was introduced at the start of the Supporting People funding programme in April 2003. The Centre for Housing Research (CHR), based at the University of St Andrews, is responsible for the administration of the Client Record System. Further information about Supporting People Client Records can be found at www.spclientrecord.org.uk, including summary reports to Supporting People Teams and Excel lookup sheets for summary information at Administering Authority, Regional, and England levels. 7

Supporting People Client Records Executive Summary for Annual Report 2005-2006 8