This report sets out the council’s response to the Cost of Living rises and includes a summary of activity undertaken to date. A scoping document has been agreed by the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Panel and this is attached as part of this evidence pack.

The Panel are asked to consider the schemes in place to support vulnerable residents from across the borough and to review targeting and outreach to residents in need in particular. There is a specific opportunity to influence the refresh of the Household Support Fund partnership scheme, which will be relaunched at the start of July.

The Panel are asked to provide feedback and relevant recommendations to officers for consideration.

Rebecca Hatch, Head of Strategy and Communications, said that the report was structured around four main aspects of the council’s response. Here to Help was the initial response to the increase in cost of living and brought together help and advice from a number of different sources in to one centralised place. The campaign had initially been launched in May 2022 and was refreshed in October 2022 to reflect the winter pressures that many vulnerable residents had faced. The second focus was on central government schemes, for example council tax support and energy rebates. The revenues and benefits team had worked on administering this support to residents. The design and delivery of the Household Support Fund had also been considered, this was a national scheme and RBWM had been allocated a grant sum of funding to spend. The fund had initially been targeted at children who were on free school meals but more recent tranches of funding allowed the council to be more flexible with who they supported. The council had also facilitated a network of warm spaces across the borough, which included community organisations and libraries coming together to offer safe spaces for the community.

Councillor Price thanked officers for the clear and detailed report. She had initially suggested the topic as she wanted to see the effective work which had taken place and whether there were any groups of vulnerable residents which were not being reached. Leaflets had been distributed but this had not provided an uplift in applications for support. Another area to consider was residents who had mortgages but had seen the mortgage rate increase rapidly. It was important for the council to look forward at what it could do to help residents.

David Adam, from Citizens Advice Bureau East Berkshire, explained that Citizens Advice was one the delivery partners for the Household Support Fund. The fund had allowed the organisation to reach out to residents and also for residents to see what support can be provided. There was a national figure of £19 billion worth of benefits which went unclaimed each year and it was therefore important that residents were made aware of the support available. There was concern that more people could find themselves in financial difficultly.

Councillor Howard asked how much of the funding provided by the council had been spent and how much had gone unclaimed.

Rebecca Hatch confirmed that for the Household Support Fund, this had all been spent. A number of residents received funding automatically in the form of vouchers for free school meals. Vulnerable residents were identified by one of the 14 partners organisations which were working with the council, with a range of different organisations being part of the scheme. A big communications push had been launched earlier this year as there had been concern that not enough residents were aware of the additional support which could be provided.

Councillor J Tisi understood that the reason why there were no financial implications in the report was because the council was receiving money and deciding how it should be spent. He asked of the latest tranche funding of £1.175 million, how much of this had been taken up and whether this would be spent in a similar way to previous tranches.

Jesal Dhokia, Partnerships and Community Service Lead, explained that the same model would be used for tranche 4. The council would be using partner engagements to understand which cohorts needed targeting but it would follow a similar pattern to previous tranches. The older age cohort had been difficult to reach and this would be targeted. The partner organisations remained the same.

Councillor Price asked if partner organisations would give holistic support to residents, for example they could signpost vulnerable residents to the relevant support if it was not something that they could provide directly.

Jesal Dhokia said that services would be wrapped around individuals, a wide range of organisations were used to provide support. The community hub information portal was also being revised which would allow residents to understand the range of support available. This was a key theme which had come out of the world cafes, these had been run in wards across the borough.

Councillor Price said that in Dedworth, there was a community champion at Tesco who ensured that the noticeboard displayed different services and support available in an accessible place. Age Concern had also displayed leaflets on things like lampposts, these methods allowed organisations to reach older age groups who may not have access to the internet.

The Chair noted that ward issues had been picked up and that some wards needed to be targeted individually. He asked if Councillors would be contacted to see what they could do to help.

Jesal Dhokia said that last year, the team had reached out to all Councillors. There were plans for the second stage of this project to continue from October onwards.

Councillor Reeves noted that Councillors would be reached out to on an ongoing basis about the project, he asked when the next update would be as there were a number of new Councillors. At a recent world café, Councillor Reeves had suggested that he could print out handouts and put them in places like local shops where they could be easily seen. Leaflets could be given to Councillors at future world cafes to encourage them to help spread information in their wards. Councillor Reeves asked if officers would be monitoring new methods of distributing information and whether they had an effect.

Jesal Dhokia explained that the first year of the world café programme had now been completed. All Councillors would be engaged with as part of the programme going forward. The project was open and transparent on RBWM Together. Leaflets had not been prioritised as feedback from recent world cafes was that the leaflets did not work. The Household Support Fund was reviewed at regular intervals and Jesal Dhokia was happy to speak to any Councillors about the fund at any time.

Rebecca Hatch added that the Household Support Fund application system had been set up so that it captured key information like age, this allowed the council to keep track on which cohorts were being reached. Optalis had been brought in as a partner as they provided an opportunity to reach older people. There was a reluctance amongst older age groups to put themselves forward for support.

Louise Freeth, Head of Revenues, Benefits, Library and Residents Services, said that the requirements of the Household Support Fund had changed. In tranche 2, there had been a requirement for the council to spend up to a third of the funding assisting older individuals. The council had decided that any pensioner who was in receipt of Council Tax support would automatically receive £100 from the fund. This was either directly into their bank account or used as council tax credit. £207,000 had been allocated in tranche 2 using this method.

Councillor Hunt complimented officers and David Adam for their work on supporting vulnerable residents. The world cafes had been very successful, feedback on vouchers had been taken on board.

Councillor Price said that the voluntary organisations needed to be considered as they were having their own cost of living issues, for example a rise in utility bills. This then increased the pressure on organisations who were trying to support residents.

Councillor Wilson asked if the council tax system could be used as proof of residency. He suggested that ‘word of mouth’ could be a useful source of spreading information amongst different communities.

Jennifer Hardy, National Management Trainee in Transformation and Community Service, said that there was a Community Champions magazine which had been recently launched. This was a form of community engagement which was targeting word of mouth and the individual networks that community champions were part of.

Louise Freeth said that linking applications with the council tax database was discussed at the time but it was discounted because not everyone was registered for council tax under their own name, families living together was an example. There was also the issue of individuals needing to know their council tax reference number so that this could be linked on the system. It was more likely individuals would have their driving license or a bank statement proving their address than their council tax number. Louise Freeth would need to explore with the system software provider whether residents could prove their address using their council tax details or other means, as the system was not currently configured in this way.

Councillor Sharpe was interested to see how other local authorities were helping to support residents.

David Adam said that RBWM had a consistent scheme as it had continued to run following the issue response to the cost of living crisis. There were a number of councils across the country where schemes of support had stopped. Some councils gave Citizens Advice the responsibility of administering payments but this took time and resource away from helping residents.

Councillor Reeves noticed that the project had been shortlisted for an award and this was testament to the work that officers had put in. He suggested that this should be promoted on the literature which was distributed about the scheme. Councillor Reeves asked if residents could volunteer to help as part of the scheme and be ‘there to help’.

Jesal Dhokia responded by explaining that the skills voluntary programme would be launched shortly and Councillors would be sent details of how they could get involved. RBWM had an adult learning provider where gaps in skills and training could be identified through courses.

Councillor Price commented on the scoping document where it had been mentioned that the scrutiny review could be publicised to increase community involvement.

Jesal Dhokia said that she was happy to work with Councillor Price to see how much of the document could be shared on the website.

Councillor Wilson suggested that a ‘quick read’ version of the guidance and support could be provided for those residents who did not have time to read about the full support on offer.

The Chair highlighted social media engagement and that it was pleasing to see a good number of impressions and engagements, but it was not clear whether these translated into more applications. The Chair summarised some of the points raised by Panel Members. These included how Councillors could be updated on the progress of the Household Support Fund, widening the net to capture more vulnerable residents that needed support, the ease of application for residents and transparency around the process.

Councillor Reeves said that Age Concern Windsor was a partner organisation which covered the Windsor area, he asked if there were similar organisations which covered Maidenhead.

Jesal Dhokia said that there were organisations which covered other parts of the borough, for example Age Concern Berkshire East. Older residents groups had also been contacted to see how the council could support them.

Councillor Price asked if organisations were being supported by the council, who could then provide direct support to residents. She questioned if this was part of the project.

Jesal Dhokia explained that she was currently working on the voluntary sector engagement strategy. There were plans to have a summit with the voluntary sector in November which would explore capacity and resource building.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Panel noted the report and:

i)             Looked to provide feedback and relevant recommendations for consideration.