During September we
- responded to 56 enquiries
- made 50 decisions
- 12 community care grants
- 38 crisis grants
- upheld 8 (67%) community care grants and 10 (26%) crisis grants
- signposted an additional 51 applicants to other sources of assistance. 78% of these were calling us instead of their local council in error. 12% reported accessibility issues as their local council had no freephone number or they were unable to apply online
- received 5 enquiries from local council liaison contacts seeking advice on the guidance.
Engagement
This month, we published insights from a survey of third sector organisations to better understand barriers to the review process and why fewer applicants are reaching independent review. We received valuable feedback on both our service and the wider delivery of the fund, and wish to thank all who contributed. In the months ahead, we will take forward actions based on this feedback.
We also welcomed 27 staff from 19 councils to our Local Authority Sounding Board on 8 October. Key topics discussed included:
- An overview of our recent casework and key learning points
- Examples of best practice in council’s casework
- A new project aimed at improving the accessibility of our communications
We also held engagement sessions with several third sector organisations to raise awareness of our role. These included housing associations and charities supporting refugees and people affected by domestic abuse. More sessions are planned in the coming weeks. If you would like us to come and speak to your team please get in touch.
Case studies
Resident within the local authority area
C applied for money to cover food and utility costs, having incurred additional expenses while temporarily staying in another local authority area to support a seriously ill family member.
The council initially declined the application, assessing that C was not resident in their area and advised them to apply to the authority where they were temporarily staying. At first-tier review, the decision was upheld on the same grounds. C subsequently applied to the second local authority, which also declined the application, citing non-residency.
We reviewed the council’s file and spoke with C. We were satisfied that C was still resident in their home local authority and was only temporarily away. There was no evidence to suggest otherwise and C was still returning to their home local authority for medical appointments. We changed the council's decision and instructed them to award £141.45.
Recommendations
- Award £141.45.
Feedback for the council
- They incorrectly interpreted the residency situation.
- The initial decision was made outwith the timescales set out in the guidance.
You can find more case studies in the searchable case directory on our website.