No one left out: communities ending rough sleeping Personalisation Approaches

Rough sleeping: background and progress Our new strategy published in 2008 – No One Left Out: communities ending rough sleeping signals our intent to work with partners and across government to end rough sleeping by The 2009 total of rough sleepers found on street counts showed 464 people on the streets on any given night. A slight reduction on 483 in 2008 and continues the good work underway since We’ve made good progress – but there is still a need to improve how we prevent and tackle rough sleeping

Implementation: A Strategic Delivery Framework The Right Help in the Right Place at the Right Time Strategic Approach and Partnerships – right people, shared goals Early Interventions Services – proactive housing options and community support Prevention and Emergency Accommodation Services – responsive services to divert people away from the street Contact and Assessment through Outreach - supporting people off the streets as quickly as possible Accommodation and Support Pathways – sustainable moves away from the street Specialist Support for health, skills and work– fulfilled lives

Personalising approaches to prevent and tackle rough sleeping London 205 – flexible approaches for the most entrenched Outreach practice – involving service users and balancing engagement and enforcement Housing First approaches Complex Trauma Guide Champions Personalisation Pilots

Personalisation Action 9 We will promote personalisation including testing individual budgets to increase the control people have over the services they need because: Rough sleepers have diverse needs Entrenched rough sleepers are not being reached Some are unwilling to accept the help currently available For some, the available “offer” isn’t “right” Innovative services and offers are needed that don’t continue to replicate things that haven’t worked Increased self-control and autonomy may promote engagement

Personalisation Pilots City of London – with Broadway Exeter and North Devon – with Exeter County Council Nottingham City – with Framework Northampton – with Northamptonshire County Council and CAN Early days – out of London pilots confirmed in July 2009

Personalisation Pilots Partnerships and resources Who needs to be involved? What inputs – advice/ support/funding are required from different stakeholders? Rough sleepers involved Identification of most entrenched; Profiles (needs/ issues/ wants) Model of delivery Brokerage arrangements, lead professionals, delegated budgets Challenges Barriers/ difficulties; Learning/ ways forward Successes Outcomes/ impacts; Learning/ replicability/ top tips Evaluation and mainstreaming Evaluation; Development of retrospective RAS; Invest to Save/ business case Dissemination

Common elements of personalisation pilots Identification of rough sleepers who have critical and substantial needs in relation to normalised (entrenched) rough sleeping, alcohol and drug misuse and dependency, lack of involvement with social care and support systems, no involvement with education, employment or training and at risk from abuse, aggressive behaviour and personal neglect. Multi agency approach – VCOs, housing, adult social care (in most) Lead professional role established (sometimes called “brokers” or “link workers”) with delegated budgets Development of personalised plans Distinct and different offers developed with service users Tailored personalised packages of services spot purchased and commissioned. Funded through “individual budget” pot (c. £2 - 5k) for spending on items or activities which contribute to the agreed outcomes

The People Northampton looking at three groups with different indicative budgets: Recent rough sleepers Medium to long term rough sleepers Long term rough sleepers with complex needs Other pilots focused on entrenched clients, including: Couples in complex relationships People with physical and mental health difficulties People with learning disabilities and histories of abusive relationships and leaving accommodation People who’s initial requests can be met, who then qualify and introduce barriers (e.g. mobile home on farm –but the farm must be away from people - and the farm must be organic – and not have any animals…) People with drug and alcohol dependency Most have complex needs and many have some contact with the criminal justice system

The ideas Rent deposit funds in area of family connection Purchasing support from agencies in new areas Dental work Negotiating access to specialist residential care Pay as you go phones to keep in touch Bus passes to enable volunteering Rent up front for accommodation “tasters” Paying off arrears – utilities, rent etc. Clothes for interviews/ training Upgrading hearing aids Camper vans and site fees Nowrongdoor

Learning to date… Adult social care partners key – bring on board through “invest to save”/ benefits realisation approach Strong links to established multi-agency partnerships help – avoids cutting across each other (e.g. gap in involvement from CJS identified in one pilot) New approaches more important for engagement than cash Need workers (and service users) on the ground to have appropriate delegated authority – able to spend funds flexibly and creatively, whilst securing “panel” sign-off for longer term larger commitments Accept the risk – discuss how the expenditure will help exit from the street to share accountability; what service users want is usually reasonable Some clients don’t know what they want – initial suggestions from workers; need to ensure this doesn’t prevent creativity