1 / 19

Modelling the Abolition of the Priority Need Test

Modelling the Abolition of the Priority Need Test. Dr. Andrew Waugh. Overview. Legislative Changes & Key Questions Arising The Model & Using HL1 Data A Case Study Authority Impact of Abolition Combined Measures Conclusions. Legislative Changes. Housing (Scotland) Act 2001

rocco
Download Presentation

Modelling the Abolition of the Priority Need Test

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Modelling the Abolition of the Priority Need Test Dr. Andrew Waugh

  2. Overview • Legislative Changes & Key Questions Arising • The Model & Using HL1 Data • A Case Study Authority • Impact of Abolition • Combined Measures • Conclusions

  3. Legislative Changes • Housing (Scotland) Act 2001 • Temporary Accommodation for all homeless households until discharge of duty • Permanent accommodation • Modernised Right to Buy • Homelessness etc. (Scotland) Act 2003 • Extension then abolition of the priority need test. • Power replaces duty to investigate intentionality • Suspension of the local connection provision.

  4. Key Questions • What is the impact of implementing the abolition of the priority need test on: • Number of temporary accommodation places needed • Time spent in temporary accommodation • Number and proportion of lets required by homeless households • Method of abolition? • Big Bang: 31st December 2012 • 2 Stage: 31 March 2009 & 31st December 2012 • Gradual: from 31st December 2005. • Type of accommodation required?

  5. applications Temporary accommodation lets A Dynamic Model: Overview • The number of households • The flow of households to different tenures + homelessness

  6. Important Factors • Homelessness Applications • Method of Abolition • Households in the Homelessness System (~Temporary Accommodation) • Time spent in the homelessness system • Supply of lets in the Social Rented Sector • LA and RSL right to buy rates • Termination Rates

  7. ? Lets ? Lets ? Lets ASSDATE APPDATE CLOSDATE A Dynamic Model: Homeless Households OUTCOME Awaiting Assessment Priority Need Non-Priority Need ASSESS

  8. Terminations A Dynamic Model: Supply • Change in # of Tenants = New Build + Relets -Terminations –RTB • Change in Voids = Terminations-Relets -Demolitions • Change in Stock = New Build – RTB-Demolitions • Maximum Supply = New Build +Terminations • Actual Supply = New Build + Relets

  9. The Effect of Abolition – Key Assumptions

  10. Terminations per Annum • Terminations available to new tenants (excludes transfers) • 2003/4 2017/18 • LA: 520  380 • RSL: 160  170 • Total: 720  550

  11. The Effect of Abolition (1): Lettings 2003/4 • c. 160 LA lets (25%) • c. 15 RSL lets (10%) 2017/18 • c. 160 LA lets (42%) • c. 35 RSL lets (20%)

  12. The Effect of Abolition (2): Households in the System • An extra 70 households from abolition • An extra 20 households from declining supply • 90 in total

  13. The Effect of Abolition (3): Time Spent in the System • Total Household Days in the system = number of households x time spent in system • c 9.6k in 2003/4 • c 11k to 17k 2011/12 • c 23.8k 2017/18 • Increase in p/n households • Longer time

  14. The Effect of Abolition: Summary • A growing proportion of lets to homeless households, even if number remains the same. • A marked increase in households in the system + therefore in temporary accommodation. • A marked increase in the time households spend there. • Impact on Council’s ability to meet wider housing needs + implications for broader social issues

  15. Proactive Approaches • Reduce applications and /or increase lets • Reduce applications – homelessness prevention work • Increase Lets to Homeless Households • Section 5 Referrals to RSLs • Increase rate of RSL new build • Reduce the RSL / LA RTB rate • Increase the number of LA lets to homeless

  16. Proactive Approaches: Impact • No single measure is sufficient to meet the increase in homelessness in case study authority • A combination of measures are needed. • Scenario A – only increase lets to homeless households • 211 (55%) of LA lets • 31 (18%) of RSL lets • Scenario E • Increase LA & RSL lets • Increase rate of new build in 2003-2008 to 200 units pa. • Reduce LA RTB rate from 3.1% to 2% • Reduce applications to 800 pa

  17. Combined Measures

  18. Conclusions • The abolition of the priority need test will lead to: • More households in temporary accommodation • Households spending longer in Temporary Accommodation • Proactive approaches are needed if the impact of abolition is to be reduced • A combination of measures are required. • Reduce applications • Increase total supply of lets • Increase number and proportion of lets to homeless households

More Related