Search results

Extra care housing has developed from sheltered housing and has increasingly been seen as a popular option by policy‐makers for a number of reasons. These include the inability of conventional sheltered housing to be an adequate solution for a growing population of very old people, the decline in popularity and high costs of residential care and perceived problems with older people staying in mainstream housing. There is, however, no agreed definition of extra care housing, even though a growing number of government grants are becoming available for this type of housing. This is causing confusion for providers and for older people and their families who are not sure exactly what is provided. This lack of clarity means that this form of housing has become an erratic and piecemeal form of provision.

Sheltered housing schemes for older people took a new turn in the UK with the community care policy of the early 1990s giving care provision for people living in such schemes. There is relatively little research on what sheltered housing schemes provide and what makes them work well. Data was gathered in relation to sheltered housing provision for older people in the north Antrim area of Northern Ireland through 10 focus groups with tenants and 16 questionnaires administered with managers of schemes. Tenants valued the independence and choice of sheltered housing in comparison with institutional care. They also highly valued the social interaction with other tenants, fostered by activities such as coffee mornings, regular lunches and social events. Tenants often helped each other with transport and when sick. Tenants of schemes in small towns were generally satisfied, because of access to shops, churches and other services. Transport was an issue for many, particularly in more rural areas and in relation to attending hospital appointments. Scheme managers were often available to tenants for long and anti‐social hours. The home care arrangements were generally regarded as satisfactory although there were criticisms of the limited hours for tasks and the skills of some care workers. Some scheme managers thought that the publicly‐funded homecare service would be more efficient if the staff were managed from the housing scheme. Appropriate social activities and effective care arrangements are an important aspect of supported housing, as well as the independence it offers. Consideration needs to be given to access to services in locating new schemes.

This year's Reith lectures focused on older people and questioned the inevitability of the ageing process. One lecture was to an audience of older people living in an ‘extra care’ scheme focused on activity and health ‐ ‘adding life to years’. In a specially commissioned series of articles, Nigel King explains how extra care models and new ‘retirement communities’ are becoming an alternative to residential care and traditional sheltered housing. The first offers a typology for extra care. The second will be about modelling the care services, and the third on land and building development issues.

The National Consortium for Sheltered Housing (ERoSH) is responsible for promoting the benefits of sheltered, or as some providers say, retirement housing as a main component of community care. It's also responsible for raising awareness of the work of those working in sheltered housing, increasing joint working between sheltered housing, health and social services professionals, and identifying and promoting working practice. This article looks at how the practitioners involved are developing the new role for sheltered housing which has a broader scope and purpose to suit the national agenda.

Discusses the management aspects of the successful use of high‐rise accommodation in the United Kingdom, with particular reference to the large number of multi‐storey flats in Birmingham. Considers the case of the conversion of Manton House to very sheltered accommodation, examining the project aims, building works, funding, management, allocations, heating, and rent and charges. Concludes that the project has shown high‐rise housing to be an ideal secure environment and a valuable component of the community care policy.

One of the cornerstones of social housing is tenant participation. Changes to service delivery are subject to genuine consultation with the people they affect. This, believes Joe Oldman, has been forgotten in the rush to introduce floating support. Referencing the current research that Help the Aged is undertaking based on tenants' concerns, Joe argues that a greater understanding of the consequences of floating support on people's lives is needed before this new model becomes irreversibly widespread.

Extra care housing is seen as a popular option for older people by families, some older people, policy‐makers and practitioners. Some new build is being provided but another option, for which grants are available, is to remodel existing outmoded buildings. This research reports on recent attempts from 10 case‐study areas in England to remodel sheltered housing and residential care homes to extra care housing. The results are mixed, with satisfaction reported by many new tenants, anger by some existing ones, challenges at every stage of the project for design and construction teams, and issues over the provision of assistive technology and care. Nearly all the schemes experienced unexpected problems during the course of construction. Remodelling is not necessarily faster or cheaper than commissioning a purpose‐designed new building. Nevertheless, remodelling may be the only viable option for some unpopular or outdated schemes. The research showed that remodelling is not a quick fix, but that it did have considerable advantages for many of the older people and support staff who were living and working in the remodelled buildings. The research concluded that remodelling should only be undertaken when other options have been carefully examined. Drawing on the research findings, advice to policy‐makers and practitioners who are considering this course of action is outlined in the discussion.

The purpose of this paper is to enquire how housing providers can facilitate a “social scene” which helps residents to bond together and which indirectly can generate both mutual aid and a collective voice.

The study of 16 retirement housing schemes (including social rented, extra care and leasehold), involved focus groups engaging altogether 130 residents, interviews with estate managers and a postal survey with 120 respondents across eight estates.

The findings highlight an important “community development” role for existing on-site managers and the risk that a move to floating support means losing this function. They illustrate the obstacles faced by retirement housing residents in developing collective social activities or a participatory voice in management. This paper is one of several ongoing and planned outputs of the study covering different aspects of the findings.

The initial study reported here is largely based on residents’ views. A follow-up survey of over 400 estate managers is now in progress.

The findings offer warnings about the potential and limitations of self-managed housing for the older old, and the dangers of replacing on-site staff by floating support.

The research fills a gap in previous work on sheltered housing by focusing on the community rather than the individual resident. It will inform planning of housing support models to build and sustain social capital in elders’ housing schemes.