letting...you choosehomeconnections

Funded by

Choicefor Disabled Londoners

The London Accessible Housing Register Projectand Toolkit

A Report by Home Connections

Acknowledgements We would like to thank the many London boroughs and housing associations that have given their time to provide valuable advice on developing the London Accessible Housing Register (AHR) and to participate in the questionnaire survey. We would like to thank the disabled people, housing officers and housing occupational therapists who took part in more in-depth activities such as workshops and piloting elements of the London (AHR).

Thanks are also due to the independent disability advisers and to the Disabled Persons’ Advisory Group, which has brought its experience of the barriers faced by disabled people in the housing market and provided invaluable feedback on key elements of the project.

This report was produced by the Home Connections team, which was commissioned by the Greater London Authority to undertake the London AHR project and edited by Isabel Robertson.

2

Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................3

The London Accessible Housing Register project ...........................................................3 The London Accessible Housing Register.......................................................................3 The need for a London Accessible Housing Register......................................................4 Disabled people and housing ..........................................................................................5

2. Allocation of accessible housing and choice based lettings schemes ...........7

Accessible housing and choice based lettings schemes .................................................7 Feedback from the Disabled Persons’ Advisory Group on CBL schemes.......................8

3. Identifying and understanding the housing needs of disabled people .............9

Involving disabled people in defining housing need.........................................................9 Consultation with disabled people .................................................................................10 Identifying and prioritising the needs of disabled people ...............................................10 Barriers to obtaining accessible housing .......................................................................11 Importance of self assessment in overcoming barriers..................................................12 Better information, advice and support for disabled people...........................................13

4. Information about accessible housing..............................................................15

Standard property categorisation system ......................................................................16 Collection of information ................................................................................................16 Property inspection checklists .......................................................................................17

5. The London AHR toolkit ......................................................................................21

Introduction to the toolkit ...............................................................................................21 Part 1 London AHR property categorisation framework ................................................21 Part 2 The London AHR framework for assessing the eligibility of disabled people for accessible homes..........................................................................................................29

6. Investigating wider housing options .....................................................................33

Accessible homes to buy and rent.................................................................................33 Developing initiatives with the private and intermediate sectors....................................33

Glossary .......................................................................................................................37

Appendix 1 Social model of disability .......................................................................40

Appendix 2 Methodology............................................................................................42

Summary .......................................................................................................................42 London AHR online survey of social landlords ..............................................................42 Consultation with housing providers ..............................................................................42 Piloting elements of the London AHR............................................................................43

Appendix 3 Accessible housing categorisation systems used in London ............44

Appendix 4 Property inspection checklist ................................................................49

Appendix 5 Applying London AHR categories to new build housing ....................50

Appendix 6 Flow chart for property categorisation..................................................51

Appendix 7 Project participants.................................................................................55

3

1. Introduction

The London Accessible Housing Register project

1. The GLA commissioned a team of consultants in March 2006, led by Home Connections, to develop the key elements of the London Accessible Housing Register (AHR). The Home Connections team has now developed and piloted a successful model for a London AHR, to ensure that disabled people benefit from pan London choice based lettings (CBL) and choice based lettings and mobility (CBLM) schemes on an equal basis to other groups.

2. The Mayor of London’s report Housing Choice for Disabled Londoners1, sets out the steps that now need to be taken to deliver the London AHR – by Capital Moves, the pan London CBLM scheme currently being developed, by social landlords and by other stakeholders.

3. This report contains the finding of the London AHR project, which collected information, identified gaps and barriers in existing policy and practice for allocating housing to disabled people and piloted new ways of increasing choice for disabled people. It also contains the London AHR toolkit, which provides social landlords with what they need to create the foundations of an AHR.

The London Accessible Housing Register

4. The objectives of the London AHR are

• to increase housing choice for disabled and Deaf Londoners

• to ensure that accessible and adapted properties are let to disabled people who need them.

5. Delivered primarily by social landlords and through Capital Moves, it will achieve these objectives by

• advertising accessible affordable homes and, ultimately private rented homes through choice based lettings (CBL) and CBLM schemes

• providing consistent and comprehensive information about vacant accessible homes at borough, sub regional and regional level

• providing information in a consistent format about all aspects of accessibility, e.g. that a property is wheelchair accessible, has no steps or stairs, has a lift, or is located close to shops, transport and community facilities

• providing high quality standardised information about the needs of disabled Londoners who require accessible homes at borough, sub regional and regional level

• prioritising disabled people for accessible home

• promoting and signposting support, advice and advocacy for disabled home seekers

4

• providing effective channels for advertising and marketing accessible housing options across all tenures.

6. The model for the London AHR has been developed using the social model of disability, which is explained in Appendix 1.

7. The traditional model of accessible and disability housing registers2 consists of

• a register/database of accessible housing

• a register/database of disabled people

• a service of matching people to property.

8. This model has been adapted by the London AHR project to become an integral part of CBL and CBLM schemes where disabled people can bid for accessible properties advertised through CBL and CBLM schemes.

The need for a London Accessible Housing Register

9. There is a severe shortage of accessible housing in the capital to meet the needs of disabled Londoners and they are twice as likely to be living in unsuitable housing as other groups. Most social landlords do not hold accurate information about their accessible homes and as a result many accessible and adapted properties are let to people who do not need them. It is also the case that many social landlords do not advertise accessible housing through their CBL and CBLM schemes. All these factors combine together to limit the housing choices available to disabled people.

10. There is likely to be a significant increase in the numbers of new accessible properties becoming available as a result of the targets in the London Plan for wheelchair accessible housing and Lifetime Homes3. The London AHR will help social landlords to make sure that these are let to disabled people who need them. The success of the London AHR will depend on full participation by all social landlords in London. If this does not happen, information on accessible housing, allocation procedures and assessment of eligibility will continue to be patchy and inconsistent.

11. The London AHR will benefit all groups of disabled and deaf people: All groups of Londoners will benefit from the improved consistent information it will provide across London about all aspects of accessibility e.g. that a property has no stairs, has a lift, or is located close to shops, transport and community facilities. Although wheelchair users clearly have particular requirements, other people with mobility issues, long term chronic ill health, people with visual or hearing impairments and people with mental health issues and people with learning difficulties may have specific housing needs which mean they should be given priority for housing. Improved information in accessible formats and availability of targeted advice and support will benefit all groups of disabled people, enabling them to make choices about the housing that will best suit their needs.

12. The London AHR will provide numerous benefits for social landlords as well as disabled people by

5

• supporting them in implementing their new Disability Equality Duty4 and agreed policy in London to develop a London AHR integrated into CGL and CBLM schemes

• providing them with the tools to collect and provide information about the accessibility of all their properties, as required by the National Register of Social Housing (NROSH) and potentially information about the needs of disabled people for the CORE system for housing association and local authority lettings, currently under discussion

• providing guidance about assessing the needs of disabled people based on the social model of disability

• producing savings to housing budgets achieved by lower housing management costs where people are housed in properties that fully meet their needs

• ensuring that accessible and adapted properties are let to disabled people who need them and that money spent on major adaptations is not wasted

• reducing void times for lettings of accessible housing because of the improved data about the needs of disabled people across London and more opportunities for them to bid for accessible and adapted housing

• providing much better information about the stock of accessible housing and the needs of disabled people in each local authority area, which can be used for planning and local housing strategies.

13. There will be some additional costs for social housing providers in implementing the London AHR, in the form of property inspections, staff training, etc. but these should be set against the benefits to disabled people and savings in other budget areas.

Disabled people and housing

14. Disabled people continue to be excluded from many mainstream activities that other Londoners take for granted. Many lose out when it comes to housing which in turn has an impact on leisure, health and social care, and so are frequently denied the opportunity to participate fully as equal citizens. All too often, the design of housing ignores the needs of disabled people and creates barriers to inclusion or provides access in a segregated and separate way, making disabled people unnecessarily dependent on others.

15. In order to understand and tackle the barriers experienced by disabled people from a social model perspective, the GLA commissioned ‘Towards Joined-Up Lives’ to find out about the views and experiences of disabled and Deaf Londoners in the areas of housing, post-16 education and employment.

16. The report revealed barriers faced by Londoners in these areas, and highlighted the following issues:

• The areas of housing, employment and post-16 education are closely linked in relation to disabled people achieving equality, and problems in one – in particular in housing – will have a negative effect on the others.

6

• There is a serious shortage of accessible housing resulting in lack of choice and inappropriate housing provision for disabled people in London.

• Disabled people continue to experience high levels of discrimination, harassment and lack of awareness and understanding, not only from the general public, but also from professionals who come into contact with them on a regular basis.

• Services for disabled people across the city are inconsistent and not coordinated. In some cases, neglect by statutory services can lead to isolation and social exclusion.

• The benefits system with its excessive bureaucracy and inflexibility is a major barrier to disabled people achieving equality.

• Easily accessible, comprehensive, accurate and timely information, advocacy and support are vital to disabled people achieving equal citizenship.

17. There are estimated to be around 395,000 disabled women and 415,000 disabled men of working age in London, representing 17.1 per cent and 16.3 per cent respectively of the working age population5.

18. The prevalence of disability tends to increase with age, from 19 per cent of those aged 60 to 64 to 78 per cent of those aged 85 and over. Altogether there are estimated to be around 456,000 disabled people aged 60 and over in London, of whom nearly two thirds are women. There are approximately 50,000 disabled children living in London, around three per cent of the under 18 population.

19. The London and Sub-Regional Strategy Support Studies6, based on interviews with 40,000 households in London found that:

• Thirteen per cent (412,400) of London’s 3.1 million households contain at least one person who is in an identified ‘special needs’ group. These groups cover frail elderly, physically disabled, learning disability, mental health problem and severe sensory disability7

• Disabled people are twice as likely to be living in unsuitable housing as other groups. Nearly a third (130,000) of London’s ‘special needs’ households live in unsuitable housing

• While the needs of some of the 130,000 ‘special needs’ households living in unsuitable housing could be met through adaptations and/or more support in their existing accommodation, for others the solution would involve a move to accessible, adapted or supported housing as illustrated by the following:

o 32 per cent (41,057) need to move to alternative housing with specialist adaptations

o 20 per cent (26,341) require wheelchair access.

7

2. Allocation of accessible housing and choice based lettings schemes

Accessible housing and choice based lettings schemes

1. The majority of London boroughs are now part of CBL or CBLM schemes, which operate at either borough or sub-regional level. An increasing number of housing associations are joining these schemes. Communities and Local Government (CLG) recently published a consultation document8 which encourages local housing authorities ‘to include accessible properties within their choice based lettings scheme. ….. this is the best way to ensure that disabled people have the widest possible choice of accommodation.’

2. The results from the London AHR survey (see Appendix 2 Methodology) shows that housing allocation services for disabled people in at least half of London boroughs continue to operate as a separate service. This creates barriers to increasing choice for disabled people.

3. The London AHR survey found that:

• Sixty per cent of the boroughs that responded to the survey said they participated in a CBL or CBLM scheme but 40 per cent of these stated that they still operate a traditional approach to letting properties to disabled people. This involves matching the person to the property, rather than advertising accessible properties and allowing disabled people to make a choice about the property that best meets their needs.

• Half of the 73 per cent of housing associations who participated in a CBL or CBLM scheme said they continue to use traditional approaches to letting properties. Since many housing associations have properties across a number of local authority areas, some of which may not have a CBL or CBLM scheme, it is less surprising that many of them have not yet modified their lettings service to a choice based approach.

• Only a quarter of the boroughs that participate in a CBL scheme advertise all their accessible and adapted housing alongside general needs housing. Thirty seven per cent advertise selected accessible and adapted homes and the remaining do not advertise adapted and accessible housing at all.

4. An examination of the websites of different CBL schemes in London found that:

• Only one borough provided a search facility for a property by accessible housing category. One borough said they are considering providing this service in the future.

• A limited number of boroughs and housing associations provide a photograph of the property on the CBL website.

• Some of the websites could pose accessibility problems for visually impaired people, e.g. use of graphics and poor colour contrast.

8

• Two boroughs include a virtual viewing of some of their properties, so that homeseekers can view the property on a computer.

Feedback from the Disabled Persons’ Advisory Group on choice based lettings schemes

5. Members of the DPAG reported that disabled users could quickly become despondent when they have tried to bid with little or no information about the property. As one member said:

‘Choice without information is not choice’

6. Another disabled person said:

‘There are huge gaps all the way through [CBL], from advertising in inaccessible formats, allowing enough time for people's access and support needs, to be able to bid; ……..lack of accessible properties at all; people being told they "don’t have enough points to go on a transfer list" despite not being able to use stairs, and living above ground floor, and having been housebound when the lifts broke in the past’.

7. Further, the group suggested that:

• It is vital for a disabled person to have sufficient information about accessibility to check a property is suitable before accepting an offer.

• Timescales for bidding and accepting an offer are often too short to arrange a taxi, personal assistance or an occupational therapist to accompany a disabled person to view and assess the suitability of the property for their individual needs.

• Many disabled people do not have a computer at home or are not IT literate and need support to access the computer bidding system.

• Visually impaired people face particular problems with rehousing:

o There is no easily accessible assistance for filling out application forms and help with on-line bids.

o Letters and housing information are usually not provided in accessible formats.

o Property adverts on the websites can be inaccessible as they are difficult to read with graphics combined with script.

9

3. Identifying and understanding the housing needs of disabled people

Involving disabled people in defining housing need

1. To ensure that services truly reflect the needs of the community they are trying to serve, housing providers need to engage with local organisations of disabled people, such as access groups, to develop better two-way communication and to involve disabled people at every level of planning and policy making.

2. Disabled people have been involved throughout the London AHR project. For example, representatives from a small number of local disability organisations played a key role on the London AHR Steering Group from the inception of the project. One member of the Home Connections project team is a disabled person and provided advice and workshops on the social model of disability. Two disabled people were employed as independent advisors to the GLA and provided advice on effective user participation and the accessibility of the London AHR website.

3. In addition, to ensure the widest possible representation of disabled people within the project, a broad sample of organisations of disabled people from across London were invited to participate in the project. Following an initial meeting at the GLA, volunteers with relevant experience were invited to become members of the Disability Persons Advisory Group (DPAG). Members of the DPAG attended a series of meetings to provide feedback and advice on specific aspects of the project.

4. The group has been invaluable in raising awareness of the barriers to accessible housing experienced by disabled people. In particular, they have provided advice and information on

• their experience of housing allocations and CBL schemes, and suggestions for improvement

• what should be included in an accessible housing register

• how the housing needs of disabled people should be identified and the information to be included on the register about the disabled applicant’s needs

• advocacy, support, information and advice needed by disabled people to make an informed choice about their housing options

• the design of the final scheme that emerged from the pilot and ensuring the accessibility of the London AHR website.

10

Consultation with disabled people

5. The London AHR survey found

• sixty per cent of boroughs surveyed did not consult specifically with disabled people on developing housing policy and procedure, and planning for new homes

• only one housing association indicated that they carry out active consultation with their disabled residents.

6. Throughout the project, the team prioritised user involvement and consultation with stakeholders from a breadth of relevant organisations. The team has listened to the needs and aspirations of disabled people and worked with housing allocations managers, housing officers and occupational therapists to create the foundation for a better service that will positively contribute to the quality of life for all disabled Londoners.

7. To ensure that the development and quality of user involvement is maintained, the team suggests that

• disabled people should continue to be involved in the development and implementation of the London AHR

• the DPAG should be used to contribute to the integration of the London AHR into Capital Moves

• disabled people with experience and qualifications should be offered the opportunity to be employed as trainers and auditors to disseminate training on the London AHR toolkit to housing providers and they could also be employed directly to carry out property access audits

• the Capital Moves project consider employing a disabled person who can act as an adviser to ensure that disabled people are fully involved in its development.

Identifying and prioritising the needs of disabled people

8. The London AHR feasibility study9 found that very few boroughs held full information about the housing needs of disabled people in their area, which makes it difficult to plan for future need or to allocate accessible housing when it becomes available for letting.

9. CLG is suggesting that ‘local authorities and housing associations improve data kept on the accessibility of properties and tenant requirements in a shared data system’. A shared system should enable a more coordinated approach to rehousing disabled people and provide ‘the data on housing need at a local and regional level for planning purposes’10.

10. The majority of organisations use the housing application form to identify priority for housing including collecting information about long term health and disability issues. Section 167(2) d of the Housing Act 1996 provides that people who need to move on ‘medical and welfare’ grounds must be given reasonable preference

11

for an allocation. Section 167 (2) has been revised (by section 223 of the Housing Act 2004) to make it clear that ‘medical and welfare grounds’ include grounds relating to a disability. This amendment is intended to ensure that disabled people who need accessible housing are given sufficient priority in the allocation system.

11. The final decision about awarding priority on grounds of health/disability is made by the housing officer assessing the case, on the advice of the council’s or housing association medical officer. Professionals, particularly the housing or social care Occupational Therapist (OT) and/or consultant or GP involved with the person’s care are used to provide additional evidence of priority need.

12. However, it was generally felt by the DPAG that the medical model used by borough medical officers is not appropriate for assessing housing need, since it does not take account of the barriers to independent living disabled people face in their accommodation. The scarcity of housing OTs and the difficulty in obtaining assessments has been highlighted repeatedly by disabled people and housing providers. For example, a housing manager who participated in the survey said:

‘It is difficult to get an OT assessment before allocation and difficulties arise when needing a joint assessment between the surveyor and OT’.

13. This problem is slowly being overcome with more local authorities lettings/re-housing teams taking into account the wider social issues and barriers faced by disabled people when making decisions about housing priority and employing housing OTs to focus specifically on the rehousing issues of disabled people.

Barriers to obtaining accessible housing

14. The following issues were raised by members of the DPAG, as significant barriers to obtaining accessible housing.

Registering for housing

15. Members of the DPAG fed back that many disabled people find it difficult to get their needs assessed properly and in some cases to be accepted on the housing register. As a result of inadequate or poor assessment of individual needs some disabled people in genuine need are not eligible to join their local authority’s housing register.

Assessment of disabled applicants’ housing need

16. There was general consensus from members of the DPAG that assessments by borough medical officers do not take into consideration the person’s wider social needs as well as the barriers that disabled people often experience getting into and moving around their home and local area.

17. They felt that assumptions are often made about disabled people’s needs, for example, ‘disabled people don't need access to a garden’, ‘disabled people shouldn't live above the first floor’, ‘disabled people should live together’.

18. Concerns were raised that the narrow definitions of housing priority that are currently used by some housing providers can significantly discriminate against disabled people. It was suggested that there are people who are not awarded a housing priority because their home is considered to be ‘suitable’, in spite of the

12

fact that the wider community remains inaccessible; thereby creating a barrier to accessing work opportunities and support networks.

19. The DPAG heard from one young adult who wants to live independently of her parents. She has been to university and is now back living at home. She does not have enough points to qualify for social housing because her housing provider has said that her parents’ home is ‘adequate’ to meet her physical needs. It was felt that the housing provider had ignored her need to live and participate in the wider community as an independent adult. It was suggested that by adopting narrow definitions of need, disabled people can be forced into situations of dependency, which can result in significant levels of unhappiness and distress.

20. An assessment using only the medical model based on diagnosis, prognosis and current treatment was felt to be inadequate. It was suggested that GPs (who are often employed as borough medical officers) do not have sufficient specialist training in disability equality issues nor enough housing expertise or knowledge of the wider social barriers affecting the disabled person to make a good assessment of their housing need and priority. They can only make a medical assessment and social housing providers need to develop other ways of assessing the physical and social barriers faced by disabled people in their homes.

Importance of self assessment in overcoming barriers

21. There are improvements that can be made to ensure that disabled people receive a fair and equal service. Members of the DPAG felt that it was important that some degree of self-assessment should be incorporated into the assessment process to enable disabled people to take greater control and provide them with an early indication as to their likely priority.

22. Members of the DPAG felt that more appropriate assessment should take into account the person’s social situation and their ability to access the wider community, include access to shops and local amenities, access to work, transport and support networks.

23. The following issues need to be incorporated into a more inclusive approach to prioritising disabled people’s housing needs:

• Physical barriers to daily living: getting in and out of the home, access to bath/shower and toilet, and the kitchen and if the property is un-adaptable to meet the needs of the person.

• Barriers to daily activities such as accessing transport, local facilities and services.

• Barriers to good physical and mental health – for example, prejudice, level of risk in the home, isolation and level of security in the wider community.

• Seeking independence away from parents/guardians – this is an important issue for young disabled people who are assessed as having their housing needs met in their parents home and therefore remain dependent on them.

• Provision of a bedroom for the sole use of a disabled child where it may be the expectation that because of the age of the child, they would normally be expected to share a room with a sibling.

13

• Provision of an additional bedroom for a carer.

• Choosing to move for a reason other than unsuitability of the property, such as, being closer to work or support networks.

24. Priority for accessible housing should not just focus on barriers to physical mobility, i.e. wheelchair access, but should include wider considerations, for example:

• People with a visual impairment should have an opportunity to be prioritised for a property with no steps.

• People of a larger stature should have an opportunity to be prioritised for a property with adequate space standards.

• The need for adequate space for the storage of necessary equipment to support independent living and medical equipment for home treatment, for example home dialysis.

• A greater degree of flexibility needs to be given to assessing the needs of people with progressive conditions, based on their future rather than current needs.

Better information, advice and support for disabled people

25. Inaccessible and insufficient information have been identified as a major barrier to obtaining accessible housing by the DPAG. In the context of a shortage of suitable homes, the lack of information and advice compounds the lack of choice. A member of the DPAG commented:

‘There’s no choice at all at the moment, let alone informed choice’

26. A recent Government consultation paper suggests a more proactive approach:

‘Disabled people may need additional assistance and support to participate in a choice based scheme on an equal footing with other applicants’ ….for example … ‘information in accessible formats: audio tape, CD, moon and Braille, ensuring there is telephone advice for those who cannot use a web-site, or cannot access a property or advice shop, also making arrangements including providing transport to visit properties’.11

27. The London AHR survey found that information and advice services appear to be patchy and there is no existing London wide signposting service for disabled people with housing problems. One housing provider said:

28. ‘Some issues arise whereby disabled people require more advice and support actually bidding. Our service has changed ……to try and provide more support but it is still limited and I am concerned that some people are simply missing out, particularly those who might have difficulty accessing websites and other ways of communication’.

29. The survey found the following:

14

• Support and advice for disabled home-seekers come primarily from within the borough housing departments provided by a generic advice team or person.

• Only one borough said that they had a specialist team who are able to offer advice and support to vulnerable and disabled applicants to ensure full participation in a choice based lettings scheme.

• Only two boroughs said they use the services of a local disability group for housing advice. Local disability groups and advocacy services are essential to provide housing support and independent housing advice and signposting to council services, but evidence from the DPAG suggests that these organisations are severely under resourced.

• One borough commented that they provide advice and support ‘from a number of sources and not specific to any one department or team.

• Comments from housing associations ranged from ‘we tend to do home visits which disabled residents can request at anytime’ to ‘none [advice] provided by us’.

• Some boroughs were more proactive than others in keeping people informed about the availability of a suitable home. 62 per cent said they make personal contact by phone or email, 25 per cent said they send property details to the person’s home, and 19 per cent said they target information about suitable properties which become available for letting by sending individual letters to disabled people on their list.

30. Members of the DPAG emphasised the need to have a common, pan-London approach to the promotion and signposting of support, advice and advocacy services for disabled people in housing need. It was suggested that barriers to independent living could be reduced by adopting a ‘housing options’ approach, which

• promotes a wider range of housing options

• makes sure that comprehensive information is available about adaptations

• offers signposting to specialist support advice services where required

• produces information in a range of accessible formats targeted at disabled people.

15

4. Information about accessible housing 1. The research on CBL schemes12 has shown that they give social housing tenants

more say about where they want to live and enable them to trade off various housing preferences – for example to bid for a property in a less popular area to secure a tenancy more quickly – and take into account personal factors that affect locational preferences, such as family, support and employment, which traditional allocations systems struggle to do. Some disabled people will compromise on the accessibility of a property for a home in a more convenient location, with better access to facilities or transport or more space. Maximising the amount of information provided about all aspects of accessible housing will enable disabled people to make these choices in the same way as other groups, when using CBL and CBLM schemes.

2. There is at present no standardised approach for recording information about accessible housing in London, although the introduction of the National Register of Social Housing (NROSH) is introducing standardised data fields for recording information about property accessibility and adaptations.

3. Results of the survey and consultation with housing providers found that most local authorities and housing associations are collecting and recording some information on access and adaptations, and some housing providers use this information to advertise the level of accessibility of their properties through CBL schemes. However only a third of boroughs and a quarter of housing associations who responded hold a register or database of accessible and adapted housing. Half of these existing registers or databases are integrated with their main property databases or registers, and half exist as stand alone registers or databases. Nearly a third of all registers of accessible housing are only held as written records.

4. There are a variety of different systems in use across London and there is also a problem with incomplete data about accessibility and adaptations held by social landlords:

• One borough which is setting up relevant fields on access and adaptation on their housing database said; ‘there are problems in getting a balance between the data being detailed enough for lettings purposes, but simple enough so that it can be easily collated and input. Also there are problems with ensuring that data is kept up to date.’

• Only five out of the 27 boroughs housing directorates surveyed kept records on major adaptations.

• Two housing associations said they do not hold any records at all on adaptations.

5. The development of an AHR integrated into CBL schemes requires a move away from a separate stand alone database towards a system which integrates information about accessibility and adaptations with the standard information held on properties on the general property database.

6. To set up an AHR that operates across London, there is a need for the development of systems to standardise the way in which boroughs and housing

16

associations record information about accessible housing. It is important that these systems are consistent and compatible, and can communicate with one another to enable information to be shared between social landlords and disabled people across London.

Standard property categorisation system

7. The London AHR survey of social landlords found that at least 17 London boroughs and seven housing associations already have a system to categorise their accessible housing stock. However, there is at present very little standardisation across London. The three sub regional choice based lettings schemes and some stand alone choice based lettings schemes have each developed their own system for categorising accessible housing. These are based on different principles including reference to accessible housing standards, adaptations and the type of person the property would be suitable for. The table in Appendix 3 provides information about the different property categorisation systems used by local authorities and sub regional CBL schemes in London.

8. It was generally acknowledged that there was a need to standardise the categorisation system used across London to improve transparency and opportunities for mobility. The property categorisation system developed for the London AHR was based on an analysis of the various methods of categorisation used across London and incorporates elements of best practice from these systems.

Collection of information

9. The survey indicated that:

• The officers most commonly involved in collecting information about adaptations in void properties are surveyors. OTs are sometimes involved in assessing the property to meet the needs of a particular household although there is often a lack of joined up working between the different professional groups.

• Housing associations are less likely to use the services of an OT.

• Some properties are not inspected to collect information about their accessibility prior to being advertised, which means that information on access and adaptations is not always included in the advert.

10. The person who carries out void inspections is probably the best person to take responsibility for assessing its accessibility, so that access information can be sent to the lettings team for inclusion in the property advert to keep the property void turnaround time to a minimum.

11. The survey findings highlight the need for consistent and well structured systems for collecting and exchanging information about accessible housing between officers and departments.

12. It was stressed that a thorough assessment of the suitability of properties for disabled people, whether by an OT, lettings officer or a surveyor, could slow down the turnaround time. This may be one reason why specialist staff, such as housing

17

OTs are not routinely informed of all ground floor properties or properties accessed by a lift, which might be suitable for letting to a disabled person.

13. It is, however, the case that involving specialist staff at the outset to assist disabled people make an informed decision about the property they are considering accepting, could save the disabled person and the housing provider time and expense in the long term.

Property inspection checklists

14. The survey found that a paper based checklist is by far the most common method for collecting access information. However there are at least three London boroughs that are piloting electronic schemes for property inspection and one of these is for the collection of accessible housing information. Another borough has plans to introduce an electronic method for collecting property access data.

15. The project reviewed checklists that were already in use in London. All the checklists gathered similar information, although with a different bias, as illustrated below in the following systems used:

• Access audits, for example, width of doorways, height of threshold, and gradient of ramp, based on defined recognised access standards.

• Listing the types of adaptation installed in the property.

• Adaptability of the property, for example, considering the width of stairs so it is possible to discount properties where the stairs are too narrow to take a stair-lift, or asking questions to indicate whether further inspection of the property is required regarding adaptability.

16. Just one housing authority has integrated their accessible housing checklist into the full void inspection report, so that information on access and adaptations is collected as a standard part of the process.

17. Currently, up to three staff in each borough are involved in deciding whether a property is accessible or not. For example, a housing officer might complete the checklist, another officer categorise the property and a third input the accessibility data into the system.

18. To summarise, there is a high degree of inconsistency between social landlords with respect to the collection, recording and retrieval of information about accessible housing. There is a need to achieve greater consistency in these areas in order to ensure that the services provided for disabled Londoners are fair, open and transparent.

19. The housing officers who attended the consultation events and pilot meetings generally agreed that an accessibility standards checklist would be very useful to improve the quality of information collected about accessible housing. The following concerns were, however, raised during the project about the roll out of a paper checklist to collect property access information and use it to categorise the accessibility of a property:

• The length of time to complete a checklist could be a barrier to its universal acceptance.

18

• A level of skill is required to accurately measure doorways, ramp gradients, turning circles, etc.

• The motivation of housing providers to take on additional responsibilities, which are not considered essential and may conflict with performance targets set by the inspection regime (Housing Corporation and Audit Commission Housing Inspectorate).

• The time pressure to advertise a property at the earliest stage, sometimes before a void inspection has been carried out.

• The need for training across the capital to use the checklist and categorisation framework.

• The need for better processes for loading data collected from the checklists onto a central database quickly and efficiently and using it to categorise the accessibility of a property.

20. All these issues have been taken into account in the development of the London AHR toolkit described in the next chapter.

Information on adaptations and adaptability

21. A number of factors exacerbate the shortage of suitable accessible housing for disabled people. Adapted homes are often converted back to general needs housing stock after the disabled person moves out. Accessible and adapted properties are often not inspected prior to being advertised, which means that they can be overlooked and offered to people who do not need them.

22. A member of DPAG suggested that:

‘Adapted properties should stay for disabled people. If someone moves into a property with disabled facilities they should not be allowed to start taking them back out. I see no sense in the Council or RSLs having adaptations put into a property at a cost, and then someone comes along and starts taking them out. This is where I think very strict guidelines should be made and enforced’.

23. Due to limited choice, disabled people often find themselves accepting an offer on a less than suitable property and hope that it can be adapted to meet their needs. Members of the DPAG had experienced long delays with funding and fitting of adaptations. They expressed concerns about the lack of resources for Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG), as the availability and amount of grant makes a critical difference to resolving an individual’s housing problem. Boroughs in the consultation events had experience of disabled people accepting a property that later was found to be impossible to adapt to meet their needs.

24. Major adaptations such as a stairlift or level access shower facility are usually installed to overcome the barriers faced by a disabled person within accommodation that is not meeting their daily living needs. In many cases, a major adaptation carried out for a specific disabled person will make a home accessible for another disabled person and it is therefore important that this is retained and advertised. However, because of the severe shortage of accessible housing, adaptations are sometimes installed as a compromise in order to make an existing home more accessible for an individual. An example would be the provision of a

19

stairlift within the home in a fourth floor maisonette without a communal lift for external access. Whilst this may improve access within the dwelling, the disabled person will continue to have no external access and the property will not be suitable for reletting to another disabled person on change of tenancy and should not be advertised as such on the AHR.

25. Many housing providers already hold relevant information about major adaptations that could be used for the AHR. Housing providers and social services/care should already hold accurate information on stairlifts, through floor lifts and step lifts since lifting equipment in social housing or installed in private properties using disabled facilities grant (DFG), are inspected annually, by law.

26. There is generally less accurate data recorded on level access/wet floor showers for two main reasons. Firstly, some people privately replace a level access shower in their property with a bath. Secondly, there are so many descriptions for an accessible shower facility for example, walk-in showers, level access shower, wet floor shower or shower tray. Consequently, they can be difficult items to identify in an IT system.

27. The major adaptations most likely to be of use to another tenant are level access shower, stairlift, through floor lift, step lift, ramp or a wheelchair accessible kitchen. Minor adaptations such as a ceiling track hoist, specialist bath and automatic toilet are very likely to follow the resident with them to their next property since these adaptations are installed to meet the particular needs of the individual.

28. Information about accessible housing is shared between adaptation and rehousing teams in over two thirds of boroughs and housing associations. However in some organisations the link between the department responsible for installation of adaptations and the lettings team is tenuous. The development of the AHR aims to improve communication between departments and clarify the information about major adaptations that needs to be collected and recorded on property databases.

29. It is important to provide as much detail as possible about the adaptations in the property, since this enables disabled people to make a realistic choice and informed choice. National good practice guidelines supports this view, for example CLG suggests that it is important to give sufficient information in the advertisement about ‘adaptations and/or accessibility features ……so that disabled people can make an informed decision on whether or not to apply for the particular property’. In addition, that ‘disabled people should be able to see the full range of accessible properties, the number and type of properties; accessibility features and level of adaptations of each property and location’.13

30. Major adaptations are likely to make an impact on the accessibility of the property and therefore, the accessibility category it falls into and this should be clearly indicated in the information gathered.

Information about number of steps

31. With professional advice, steps can sometimes be ramped and achieve an adequate level of accessibility to the home. It is therefore important for disabled people to have information about the number of steps to a property. Some housing providers include properties with one to five steps in their local accessible housing categories in order to maximize the number of accessible properties they advertise. Properties with steps have not been included in the London AHR

20

categories but additional information about the number of steps to a property should be provided separately in the advert.

‘Adaptability’ of properties

32. The issue of assessing the potential adaptability of a property has been raised throughout the project. Clear criteria would be required to identify potentially adaptable properties, and technical advice from a surveyor or housing OT would need to be sought. The adaptability potential of a property is difficult to market as it may raise expectations but may not necessarily be accompanied by a budget to undertake the necessary work.

33. The only properties that can be marketed as ‘adaptable’ with some degree of confidence are Lifetime Homes, which are built to meet specified standards. Lifetime Homes are designed to be adaptable, flexible and meet the changing needs of households. These homes can be suitable for many disabled and older people but are not always adaptable to meet the needs of a full time wheelchair user.

34. Two boroughs in the survey said that they have a budget set aside for improving the accessibility of their housing stock. A thorough inspection is carried out on properties that meet certain criteria to assess their future adaptability potential.

35. The Mayor has produced guidance for a wheelchair accessible housing which will clarify the ‘distinction between fitting out a home for immediate occupation by a wheelchair user and ensuring the home is easily adaptable…….where the home may not be occupied initially by a wheelchair user14’. This provides more detailed guidance on the key features of a wheelchair accessible home for use by the private sector and housing associations.

Information about location, parking, access to transport and local services

36. Location, parking arrangement proximity and access to local services and public transport and accessibility to and around a home are acknowledged as important factors for people when choosing a home. Information about all these issues has been included on the property inspection checklist and should be included in CBL property adverts. It is suggested that social landlords contact their local access officer more guidance about collecting this information. If there is no local access officer, they could contact the London Region Access Association:

http://www.access-association.org.uk/regional_contacts.cfm#l

21

5. The London AHR toolkit

Introduction to the toolkit

1. The London AHR toolkit for social landlords is in two parts:

Part 1 provides a framework for categorising accessible homes, based on accepted accessible housing standards that are compatible with the accessibility data fields for the National Register of Social Housing (NROSH). It provides a standard property checklist for information to be collected about the accessibility of a property and a workflow chart for using this information to put accessible housing into the standard London AHR property categories.

Part 2 provides a framework for assessing the eligibility of disabled people for accessible homes. It also provides guidance to social landlords about assessing the housing needs of disabled people, using a social model approach.

How the London AHR toolkit was developed

2. To achieve a framework for categorising accessible housing for London, the project team held a number of meetings with the DPAG, the London AHR Steering Group and housing providers. The property categorisation system was developed after discussion and analysis of the different methods of accessible housing categorisation used across London (see Appendix 3). A pilot was carried out by ten housing providers on 46 properties, to examine the usability of the property categorisation system that had been developed. The considerable feedback that was received from the pilot was incorporated into the categorisation system that was finally agreed. The toolkit builds on the excellent practice already developed in some parts of London.

Part 1 London AHR property categorisation framework

3. The categories for accessible housing that the London AHR project team has developed provide consistency across London so that housing providers and disabled users alike can use and understand a common system. The standard categorisation framework for the London AHR is set out in Table 1.

4. NROSH is a system set up by CLG for collecting social housing data on individual properties directly from local authorities and housing associations. It will eventually provide a national database with detailed information about all aspects of affordable housing including access features and adaptations.

5. The London AHR property categorisation framework has been designed to be fully compatible with NROSH and will support social landlords in collecting the access information they will be required to provide for the NROSH housing accessibility data fields. Table 1 shows how the London AHR categories link to the NROSH categories. Some category names have been changed for the London AHR to be more user friendly and explanatory to the service user, and an additional category ‘Step-free’ has been added for the London AHR, which does not exist for NROSH.

6. A description of the accessible housing standards on which both the London AHR property categorisation system and the NROSH accessible data fields are based, is set out below.

22

Category A: wheelchair accessible and Category B: partially wheelchair accessible

7. The first wheelchair housing guidance was published by the Department of Environment (DoE) in 1975. Much of the present day wheelchair accessible social housing stock was built in the 1970s and 1980s based on these standards. This standard is now acknowledged as inadequate for many wheelchair users since wheelchairs have become bigger and more disabled people use powered wheelchairs.

8. Later standards are more inclusive and have incorporated wider corridors and doorways as well as ensuring full access to all rooms and facilities in the property. The newer standards also include aspects of external access such as parking and outdoor space. Since 1997 the Housing Corporation has included many of the NATWHAG (National Wheelchair Housing Association Group) standards in their Scheme Development Standards for wheelchair accessible housing. Habinteg Housing Association updated the NATWHAG guide in 200615 and these are the standards that are now referred to in the new Housing Corporation Design and Quality Standards16.

9. Some London boroughs have produced their own Wheelchair Accessible Guide with space standards that go beyond the Habinteg guide. The standards referred to in the London AHR toolkit will need to be updated on a regular basis to keep pace with changes in nationally published standards.

10. The model developed by the London AHR has split these older and more recent wheelchair housing standards into two categories (A and B), to acknowledge the more generous proportions of the newer wheelchair standards (category A).

11. If a property is categorised as wheelchair accessible (category A), it must meet the accepted newer wheelchair design guide standards. Other wheelchair accessible housing that does not fully meet the wheelchair accessible standard will qualify for the lower standard of partially wheelchair accessible denoted by category B.

Category C: Lifetime Homes

12. Lifetime Homes have been included in the categorisation system since they are designed to improve accessibility and to be adaptable to the changing needs of a household. The London Plan requires all new housing in London to be built to Lifetime Homes standards and this should result in an increasing number of accessible and ‘adaptable’ homes becoming available in London over the next few years.

13. Lifetime Homes are ‘ordinary’ homes incorporating 16 features that can be universally applied to housing design at minimal cost17. Each feature adds to the comfort and convenience of the home and supports the changing needs throughout a family’s life cycle. Lifetime Homes are designed to make life easier, from raising children to meeting any access needs resulting from declining mobility in older age. Despite the misconception, Lifetime Homes cannot necessarily be adapted to accommodate a fulltime wheelchair user. However, these properties are the only ones that can be truly advertised as adaptable because access within the home can usually be considerably improved. The British Standards Institution (BSI) are shortly to publish a draft British standard based on the JRF Lifetime Homes standards which will be developed into a full British Standard following a two year consultation period. The new Housing Corporation Design and Quality

23

Standards and the new Code for Sustainable Homes18 encourage the provision of Lifetime Homes.

Category D: easy access

14. Easy access is housing that is designed with wider doorways and corridors than general needs housing and has a level access approach. Housing that met the old Housing Corporation and Department of Environment ‘Mobility Standards’ would fall into this category as well as new houses and properties on the ground floor and above the ground floor with lift access built since 1999 (which should all meet Part M of the Building Regulations).

15. The term ‘mobility standards’ was used initially by the DoE in 1974 and then adopted by the Housing Corporation in their Scheme Development Standards to describe housing that is level access and more spacious than general housing. The term has been superseded by Part M of the Building Regulations, which now applies to all new build housing built since 1999. This provides a ‘visitability’ standard, i.e. the potential for a wheelchair user to ‘visit’ the property but not live in the property. Part M goes part way to meet Lifetime Homes Standards but does not, for example, include a specification for stairs that can take a future stair lift or a more spacious bathroom. Some new properties, which meet the provisions of Part M, will be properties above the ground floor without a lift. These do not provide a level access approach and would have to be excluded from the Easy Access category.

Category E: step free

16. Step free is general needs housing that is not built to any specific design standards but happens to have no steps and a level approach entrance and limited potential for future adaptability of the stairs and bathroom. This housing has no steps or high threshold at the entrance. The properties in this category also have to meet limited criteria that indicate that they may be adaptable. For instance, if there is a separate toilet and bathroom the rooms must be located adjacent to each other, to make it possible to knock-through to create a larger more spacious bathroom. Properties in this category with internal stairs also have to meet the basic requirements for installation of a stair lift.

17. A simple stairlift assessment has been included in the checklist, to exclude all properties that cannot take a basic stair-lift. The assessment includes measuring the width of the stairs, recording whether the stairs are straight or curved.

Category F: all other general needs housing

18. All general needs housing that does not fall within any of the above categories will be described as category F.

Additional information

19. Much of the detailed information about the accessibility of the property is encapsulated in the awarded category. However, There is also some additional information that should also be included in CBL adverts that can help disabled people decide whether a property that does not fall into any of the accessible housing categories might be suitable for their needs:

24

• any major adaptations

• any ground floor toilet and total number of toilets

• number of external steps to access the property

• number of internal steps on ground floor of property

• number and size of lifts

• any accessible car parking arrangements

• any accessible garden/ outside amenity space/ balcony

• information about communal facilities, local services, transport etc.

Supply of accessible housing

20. There will be a gradual increase in the number of Lifetime Homes and wheelchair accessible homes in London as a result of the London Plan target that all new homes should meet Lifetime Homes standards and ten per cent should meet wheelchair accessible or adaptable standards. However, the number of properties that fit into category A to E of the categorisation framework are likely to remain a small proportion of housing in London for some time to come because of the nature of London’s existing housing stock and the fact that new housing makes up a such a small proportion of the total housing stock. It is therefore crucial that all housing covered by the accessible housing categories is recorded and that this information is made available to disabled people through advertising them effectively in CBL schemes.

Table 1 – London AHR property categories AHR categories A Wheelchair accessible B Partially

wheelchair accessible

C Lifetime Homes D Easy access E Step-free

Property description

Designed to meet latest wheelchair accessible housing design standards offering wide door width and corridors and full access (wheelchair turning space) to all rooms and facilities Includes all new build wheelchair accessible housing built to Housing Corporation Scheme Development Standards since 2000

Designed to older wheelchair standards or significantly adapted to provide wheelchair access to at least the entrance level of the property

Designed with 16 Lifetime Homes design standards that together create an accessible and adaptable home. Main features include a level approach/entrance and wider doorways

Main features include a level approach to the entrance, wider corridors and doorways than in general needs housing. Includes all new build houses, ground floor properties and properties above the ground floor with lift access built to Part M of Building Regulations

General needs housing with a level approach/entrance to the property, and which happens to have limited potential for future adaptability of bathroom and stairs

EquivalentNROSH Categories

Fully wheelchair accessible ‘Wheelchair Housing Design Guide Standard’ (see below)

Other wheelchair user standard

Lifetime Homes standards Other accessible housing standards

No category

National standards

Wheelchair Housing Design Guide Standard - S.Thorpe and Habinteg 2006 (referred to in Housing Corporation Scheme Development Standards and new Design and Quality Standards April 2007), or other locally agreed wheelchair standard.

Older wheelchair standards E.g. DoE wheelchair standard 1974.

JRF -16 Lifetime Homes Standards www.lifetimehomes.org.uk

Mobility Standard DoE Standard 1974 and Housing Corporation Scheme Development Standards prior to 1999 when Part M of Building Regulations introduced.

No published standard

The standard property checklist

21. A standard property inspection checklist and a system for categorising properties for the London AHR has been developed as a culmination of a process of working in partnership with a number of boroughs, housing associations and the DPAG. Experienced housing officers have been involved in the design of the property checklist, and ten housing providers across London have piloted the checklist in 46 properties.

22. The checklist (Appendix 4) has been designed to minimise the time and resources required to gather the relevant information. It has been designed to be easy to use and logical. Each element has been well defined in the checklist, so that properties can be categorised consistently across London.

23. Where a property does not meet minimum accessibility criteria, the checklist can be completed very quickly. If for example, the property is above the ground floor and not serviced by a lift, the checklist can be completed with the minimum of information and the property categorised as Category F – ‘general needs housing’, without needing to visit the property. This should reduce the amount of time required to collect accessibility information on the majority of homes since a checklist will only need to be fully completed if the property meets specific minimum accessibility criteria.

24. Many housing providers will not initially have the time and funding to carry out a full survey of all their accessible housing stock. It is suggested that the checklist could be amalgamated with the void inspection procedure to ensure that the collection of access information is mainstreamed into other processes. It could also be incorporated into daily asset management procedures and in the landlord’s stock condition survey to ensure as many properties are included on the London AHR as possible.

Piloting the checklist

25. The outcomes of the checklist pilot were as follows:

• The checklist takes on average twenty minutes to complete but can take as little as five minutes when only sections A, B and C needed completing because the property did not meet basic access criteria.

• The majority of participants found the layout of the form worked well for them.

26. The following amendments were incorporated into the final checklist, in response to the suggestions put forward by the participants:

• Larger font for improved readability

• Section on access to the garden

• A column down the right hand side to assist with categorisation

• Centimetres rather than millimetre, as many people were not familiar with using millimetres

27. The chief concerns voiced by pilot participants are that housing officers and surveyors will need training to complete the forms and that the form may be too complex for them. Training is clearly necessary and a training package is being developed, which will be available in the future on the London AHR website. A guide is being produced in booklet form for housing officers to carry on site which will also be available on the website.

System for categorising properties

28. A method has been developed to assist with categorising accessible properties consistently and accurately. It includes a ‘work flow’ chart (Appendix 6) with rules designed to guide the person to use the information collected on the property checklist to make decisions about which category a property should fall into.

29. The workflow chart follows the same structure as the checklist. Using a completed property checklist, check the column on the left hand side to see if the checklist is going to result in 'no accessible housing categorisation' i.e. category F general needs housing. If not, then start at the top of the checklist and systematically work down, comparing row by row the information on the checklist to the London AHR coloured columns, to see if all essential attributes have been met. To help with categorisation, it is suggested that you use the shaded area on the right hand side of the checklist to note down the highest accessibility category achieved for each row of information collected. The attribute boxes which are shaded are for information only, and do not affect the categorisation of a property. However the information is useful to collect and can be used for advertising and marketing purposes, for example, details of major adaptations, number of steps to access the property and the location of a toilet on the access floor level.

30. A property should meet all the required attributes to be given a particular London AHR category. Once a property has gone down a category it cannot go back up i.e. if a property starts out as A, then drops to B, it can only remain as B, or drop to C or below as you work your way down the checklist.

31. New build housing should be the easiest to categorise since all new build housing built since 1999 will at a minimum meet Part M of the building regulations. All new build general needs housing on the ground floor or above the first floor with a lift should therefore come under category D, Easy Access unless it meets Lifetime Home standards in which case it will come under category C. All new build affordable wheelchair housing built since 2000 should fall under category A since it will be required to meet the full wheelchair accessible housing standard referred to in the Housing Corporation Scheme Development Standards. The table in Appendix 5 should assist in categorising new build housing using the London AHR categories.

32. Increasingly all new build housing in London should meet the Lifetime Homes standards as required by the London Plan. However, developers do not always build in accordance with the standards stated in planning applications, which means that assumptions about the category cannot always be made and some inspections or spot checks will still need to be carried out.

27

33. Concerns were expressed by housing officers about properties that do not quite fit the accessible housing categories, for example, a wheelchair accessible home in all respects except for a threshold higher than 10.5cm. It is suggested that social landlords should also keep records of these properties and consider the possibility of adaptations to make them fully accessible.

34. The West London CBL scheme LOCATA, specifically includes a ‘one’ and ‘two’ step option in their categorisation scheme as they felt that many people on their register with mobility issues could manage one or two steps (which can often be overcome with a portable ramp). A decision was made for the London AHR to only include level access properties in the accessible property categorisation system but the property checklist does record the number of steps which should also be included in the property advert to provide as much information as possible for disabled people to base their choices on.

35. Training will be vital for the successful roll out of the London AHR. The training of housing officers should ideally be based in a property and include practical training in completing the property checklist as well as disability equality training so that the person develops a better understanding of the access needs of disabled people.

Using an electronic hand held device for property inspections

36. In view of the concerns raised by housing providers about the resources need to complete a checklist and categorise a property, the AHR project team has explored the possibility that the checklist and categorisation could be done electronically with a handheld device, such as an electronic digi-pen or PDA (Personal Digital Assistant) already used by many local authorities. This would speed up the process, improve accuracy and consistency in the way information is collected, recorded and used to categorise the property.

37. The London AHR checklist has been designed to be used as part of an electronic approach for collecting the information required and categorising accessible housing. Tower Hamlets are piloting the digi-pen in the roll out of an accessible housing register in the borough, using the London AHR categories. An evaluation of the pilot will be made available on the London AHR website.

38. The benefits of an electronic method are that it

• could provide a consistent approach across London

• facilitates accurate property data collection

• enables one person to carry out the whole process of data collection and property categorisation

• is time efficient

• ensures that checklists are not lost or forgotten

• provides immediate categorisation of property, with automatic calculations

28

• requires virtually no IT training, although training on completing the form would still be needed.

38. The main challenge will be how to fund electronic devices across London and the interface with current local electronic and computer systems.

Part 2 The London AHR framework for assessing the eligibility of disabled people for accessible homes

39. This part of the toolkit defines standard eligibility criteria that can be used to prioritise disabled people for accessible housing. It also provides guidance to social landlords about assessing the needs of disabled people, using a social model approach.

40. A recent Communities and Local Government Consultation Paper19 says that:

‘The Secretary of State believes that accessible housing should be allocated to people with relevant access needs. Accordingly, the Secretary of State encourages housing authorities to design their choice based lettings schemes in such a way that priority for accessible accommodation is given to people with access needs. This is consistent with the new duty to promote disability equality’. It goes on to say that ‘While it would be lawful to provide that only disabled people can apply for accessible vacancies, it would not be lawful to provide that only disabled people can apply for accessible property’.

41. In line with this view, priority for accessible housing should be awarded in CBL schemes to disabled people who face significant barriers in their living environment and would not be able to live independently in properties, which do not meet their required space and accessibility standards.

42. The property categories in the London AHR have been designed to correlate with eligibility categories to assist with decisions on who should be given priority for each category of homes.

CORE

43. Communities and Local Government are also in the process of incorporating data fields to record the housing access needs of disabled people in their CORE (Continuous Recording of lettings) review20. The London AHR Steering Group has fed into this process and advised that the data fields should reflect the social model i.e. focus on housing access needs rather than impairment and be compatible with the data fields used for the London AHR.

Piloting and consultation on eligibility criteria

44. There has been extensive consultation on the eligibility criteria set out in Table 2 below and how they should be linked to the property accessibility categories.

29

Table 2 London Accessible Housing Register eligibility for accessible housing Classification A Wheelchair accessible B Partially

wheelchair accessible

C Lifetime Homes D Easy access E Step free

Eligibility for Accessible Housing* Category A, B, C and D, should only be offered (in the first instance) to people for whom barriers such as steps and stairs and restrictive spaces within the built environment would prevent the person from being able to live independently.

Barriers: Steps and stairs Restrictive space, where Category C would not meet full access requirements. Examples: Independent, full time, indoor use of a self propelling wheelchair Independent, full time, indoor use of a powered wheelchair Full time use of an indoor wheelchair pushed by someone else Requires extra maneuverability space or lay out requirements to accommodate other aids and adaptations.

Barriers: Steps and stairs Restrictive space, providing partial access and where Category E would not meet the access requirements Examples: Use of a wide walking aid Space for necessary equipment Use of an outdoor (only) wheelchair Requires level access or extra maneuverability space and lay out requirements to accommodate other aids and adaptations, for example – mobility related needs, hearing or visual impairment, other disability/long term illness)

Consideration should be given (in the first instance) where individual access needs would not be met by other general needs housing Example: Requires step free housing/ limited adaptations for mobility related needs, hearing or visual impairment, other disability/long term illness)

45. The main unresolved issue coming out of the consultation is whether disabled people should always automatically be given priority for category C - Lifetime Homes. Lifetime Homes are designed to support the changing needs occurring through a family’s lifecycle, from raising children to meeting access needs resulting from declining mobility in older age. These properties will increase in availability over time as a result of the target in the London Plan that in future, all new build housing should be flexible and adaptable. However, because accessible housing is at present a scarce resource, social landlords should consider prioritising these homes for allocation to disabled people, living in unsuitable housing, where appropriate.

Assessment of need

46. More appropriate assessment of the housing needs of disabled people should take into account the person’s social situation and their ability to access wider community facilities, including aspects such as access to shops and local amenities, access to work, public and private transport and support networks as well as the physical barriers they face in their more immediate housing environment.

47. Social landlords should consider incorporating the following issues into a more inclusive approach to assessing disabled people’s housing needs:

• Barriers to daily activities: getting in and out of the home, access to bath/shower and toilet, kitchen and if the property is un-adaptable to meet the needs of the person.

• Seeking independence away from parents/guardians – this is an important issue for young disabled people who are often assessed as having their housing needs met in their parents home and therefore compelled to remain dependent on them.

• Barriers to independent living: for example, prejudice, harassment, level of risk in the home, isolation and level of security in the wider community.

• Provision of a bedroom for the sole use of a disabled child where it may be the expectation that because of the age of the child, they would be expected to share a room with a sibling.

• Provision of a bedroom for the sole use of a disabled adult who requires a separate space from their partner due to their care needs, or poor sleep patterns

• Provision of an additional bedroom for a carer.

• Choosing to move for another reason other than unsuitability of a property, such as being closer to work or support networks.

48. The shortage of social housing, in particular of larger units will mean that the needs of disabled people will have to be assessed in a context of competing

priorities for social housing from other needs groups and it will not always be possible to award them a high priority or eligibility for an additional bedroom for a partner or carer.

49. Following the assessment of housing need, a disabled home seeker who meets the eligibility criteria for accessible housing should be informed of the accessible housing category they have been given priority for. It should be explained that the category is a guide, based on the outcome of the assessment of housing needs, but that the person is not restricted to bidding only for these categories of property.

50. Providing informed choice to disabled people by marketing a property’s level of accessibility should assist lettings teams in moving away from the practice of the housing provider ‘matching’ a person to a property, which is not in keeping with the culture of choice and transparency promoted by the social model of disability and choice based lettings A guide will be produced by the London AHR project team in booklet form for housing officers to carry on site.

32

6. Investigating wider housing options

Accessible homes to buy and rent

1. The London AHR aims to include accessible homes from all housing tenures. This project has also addressed the need to develop ways of advertising and marketing private sector housing options for disabled people.

2. The project explored ways to:

• Ensure that intermediate housing options including shared ownership advertised on CBL websites provide information about property accessibility using the same categories used for social housing

• Develop standardised information about vacant accessible and adapted private rented housing owned by accredited landlords to be used in CBL schemes

• Establish partnerships with the private sector to encourage estate agents and developers to advertise and market accessible housing for owner-occupation more effectively.

Developing initiatives with the private and intermediate sectors

Intermediate housing

3. The results from the survey indicated that whilst boroughs and CBL schemes increasingly seek to advertise ’intermediate housing’ there tend to be two distinct marketing processes for these schemes – the housing options website managed by the HomeBuy zone agents for London (Metropolitan Home Ownership and Tower Homes) and marketing by individual boroughs, housing associations and the CBL schemes.

Private housing

4. The private housing sector consists of three principle providers:

• developers

• estate agents

• private residential landlords.

5. Overall, there is little evidence of private sector provision for people who require accessible housing in London. There is generally a lack of awareness amongst developers and estate agents about the potential market for accessible homes. However, the London Plan targets for wheelchair accessible housing and Lifetime Homes are beginning to make an impact and some private sector housing providers are beginning to explore the potential market for accessible housing.

6. The project team carried out desktop research of existing private sector initiatives covering homes for rent and to buy, including shared ownership. A series of

telephone and face-to-face interviews with boroughs, housing associations, the HomeBuy zone agents for London, private estate agents and developers were arranged.

7. This raised the profile of the AHR to a wider audience, particularly with respect to gaining the interest of the private residential landlord sector (National Landlords Association) for the first time. Certain CBL schemes, particularly those in East London have actively engaged with private landlords and regularly advertise private vacancies. However, there are few if any accessible properties that have become available through this route.

Lack of common standards

8. Disabled home seekers’ general experience is that there are no common standards that estate agents work to, and many advertise properties as being accessible when they are not. It has been acknowledged this makes it difficult for disabled people to find a suitable property and the lack of nationally recognised methods of advertising accessible housing is a barrier for disabled people trying to buy or rent a suitable home in the private sector.

9. The project has identified two specialist agencies: Mobility Friendly Homes www.mobilityfriendlyhomes.co.uk and the Accessible Property Register (APR) www.accessible-property,org.uk that specialise in identifying and promoting accessible property for sale and rent in the private sector. Both provide standardised information about property accessibility and adaptation, both operate nationally and are increasingly involving other estate agents and social housing providers as partners. Two of the three directors of APR are wheelchair users and have personal experience of the barriers faced by disabled people in relation to housing.

10. They have developed a simplified method for identifying accessible/adaptable property. The criteria used by Mobility Friendly Homes can be found on their website.

11. Both projects are very positive about working with the London AHR and the private sector in London. Neither Mobility Friendly Homes, nor APR focus specifically on the London market, but both are keen to expand their operations in London.

Marketing the new supply of private and intermediate housing

12. The research found that many private new build Lifetime Homes and wheelchair accessible units are inadequately marketed with a consequent loss of these units to disabled homebuyers. However, many London boroughs are actively seeking to engage private developers in implementing the London Plan targets on the percentage of homes to be built to accommodate the needs of wheelchair users. There are also significant opportunities to use planning conditions and agreements (e.g. Section 106) to produce a greater supply of accessible and adaptable housing. Boroughs identified problems in ensuring that developers build to Lifetime Homes and wheelchair standard requirements and that these units are marketed effectively to disabled people.

- 34 -

13. Waltham Forest council offers a good example of how boroughs can use planning conditions for the provision of accessible housing, and encourage developers to market wheelchair adaptable homes more effectively. Liaison between developers and the borough ensures that local developments are advertised in local papers, the Metro, Disability Now and on estate agency websites.

Private sector marketing staff at the developer Hadley Homes have been given the following guidelines:

• Ensure mainstream advertising: on hoardings and website.

• Establish links to more specific information, ideally showing proposed plans/layouts.

• Ensure sales staff are aware of features as positive selling points (emphasise increased space, flexibility).

• Provide an accessible parking bay close to the sales office with level access to the office.

• Provide accurate information about accessibility of local public transport (for example, whether Tube station is wheelchair accessible, closeness to bus stops and routes of services).

Developers are also encouraged to increase the marketing period from three to six months and to provide independent financial advice to improve disabled people’s access to possible purchase options.

- 35 -

Intermediate housing options

14. Metropolitan Home Ownership and Tower Homes are the HomeBuy agents for London and both offer all HomeBuy products apart from Social HomeBuy (they signpost people to this scheme). They have a website providing a pan-London ‘one stop shop’ for the intermediate market. Between them, they have sold 5,000 homes through Open Market HomeBuy in the past two years.

15. The HomeBuy agents have not kept records of how many of these are accessible properties and they commented that it might be beneficial for disabled people to be designated as a priority group within the intermediate market in London.

16. The current priority groups are:

• key workers

• public sector tenants

• homeless people who are economically active

• waiting list applicants.

17. Although disabled people may qualify (for example, by being a key worker), they are not recognised as a priority group in their own right. Tower Homes are looking at ways of improving the marketing of wheelchair accessible intermediate housing, which is being developed mainly as a result of the London Plan targets. They are drafting an information leaflet about accessible housing shared ownership schemes specifically targeted at disabled people.21

18. This leaflet includes information about special schemes run by housing associations for people with learning difficulties, which have developed packages of finance and benefits that will enable more disabled people to buy into the intermediate housing market. These schemes help people to part buy/part rent their own home using welfare benefits. A number of banks provide the ‘interest only’ mortgages needed for this scheme. The Benefits Agency provides Income Support up to £100,000 to meet the ‘interest only’ mortgage for people who have received (or qualified to receive) this benefit for 39 weeks, and require housing that better meets their needs. Housing Benefit will pay the rent and a service charge that will cover most repairs. Buyers do, however, need to fund their legal fees, stamp duty, valuation fees and payment for the mortgage processor, which can amount to £4,000.

19. The HomeBuy agents have expressed an interest in using the property categorisation system developed for the London AHR for intermediate housing.

- 36 -

Glossary Term

Explanation

Access Refers to the methods by which people with a range of needs (such as disabled people, people with children, people whose first language is not English) find out about services and information. For disabled people, access in London is the freedom to participate in the economic, social and cultural life of the community.

Accessible housing Used in the report to describe accommodation which falls into one of the London AHR accessible categories. This ranges from step free housing to fully wheelchair accessible housing.

Affordable housing Social rented and intermediate housing

Capital Moves Capital Moves is a partnership set up between the GLA, LHF and HC, with match funding from CLG, to establish a pan London choice based lettings and mobility scheme (CBLM)

Choice based lettings and mobility (CBLM)

A lettings arrangement giving applicants for social housing greater choice and freedom to move into different areas by enabling them to 'bid' for properties in their own, and other, local authorities

Communities and Local Government (CLG)

The government department with responsibility for planning, local government, housing and regional development. CLG replaced the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in 2006

Disability The loss or limitation of opportunities that prevent people who have impairments from taking part in the normal life of the community on an equal level with others, due to physical and social barriers.

Disabled person

Someone who has an impairment, experiences externally imposed barriers and self-identifies as a disabled person.

Equality The vision or aim of creating a society free from

discrimination where equality of opportunity is available to individuals and groups, enabling them to live their lives free from discrimination and oppression.

Equal opportunities The development of practices that promote the possibility of fair and equal chances for all to develop their full potential in all aspects of life and the removal of the barriers of discrimination and oppression experienced by certain

- 37 -

Term

Explanation discrimination and oppression experienced by certain groups.

Greater London Authority (GLA)

London's city wide tier of government comprised of the directly elected Mayor of London and London Assembly.

HomeBuy Agent HomeBuy agents provide a one stop shop service for marketing and assessing eligibility for intermediate housing.

Home Improvement Agencies

Non-profit making organisations managed locally by local authorities, housing associations or charitable bodies to help older, disabled or vulnerable people remain independently in their homes. They help with resources and funding for repairs and home improvements.

Housing association A non-profit voluntary body formed to provide housing. Housing Associations are legally constituted and may be charitable trusts, industrial and provident societies or, occasionally, companies.

Housing Corporation (HC)

The non-departmental public body with responsibility for public housing investment and regulation of registered social landlords.

Inclusive design Design that creates an environment where everyone can access and benefit from the full range of opportunities available to members of society. It aims to remove barriers that create undue effort, separation or special treatment, and enables everyone regardless of disability, age, or gender to participate equally, confidently and independently in mainstream activities with choice and dignity.

Intermediate housing Housing that is affordable for households with an annual

income of between £16,900 and £52,500 This includes housing provided through low cost home ownership schemes.

Lifetime Home standards

Based on 16 point Lifetime Home specification, designed to provide accessible and convenient accommodation for a large segment of the population, from young children to older people and disabled people with physical or sensory impairments.

London Councils (LC)

The representative body for local government in London including the 32 London boroughs and the Corporation of London.

- 38 -

Term

Explanation

London Housing Federation (LHF)

The regional office of the National Housing Federation that represents independent, non- profit housing associations in London.

London Plan The Mayor's Spatial Development Strategy for London.

Registered social landlords (RSLs)

Not for profit organisations that have registered with the Housing Corporation as public housing providers.

Section 106 agreement

An agreement made under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 between a planning authority and developers. Section 106 agreements require developers to make payments in kind or in cash to reduce the impacts of development by providing, for instance, affordable housing or the physical and social infrastructure required to support new development.

Social model of disability

The social model applied to housing defines disability as the disadvantage experienced by an individual resulting from barriers to independent living and housing opportunities that impact on people with impairments and/or ill health.’

Supported housing Housing that offers a range of support services that can enable vulnerable people to live independently. Support can be accommodation-based or floating.

Wheelchair accessible housing

Homes built to standards that are designed specifically to meet the diverse and changing needs of wheelchair users and the multiplicity of barriers that disabled people experience.

- 39 -

Appendix 1 Social model of disability The social model of disability has been used as a framework for developing

‘Improving the life chances of disabled people’22. It provides a definition of disability, which incorporates the social model.

‘Disability is defined as the disadvantage experienced by an individual resulting from barriers to independent living and housing opportunities that impact on people with impairments and/or ill health.’

A clear distinction is made between disability, impairment and ill health. Impairments are long-term characteristics of an individual that affect their functioning and/or appearance. Ill health is the short-term or long-term consequence of disease or sickness. Many people who have an impairment or ill health would not consider themselves to be disabled.

Disabled people face a wide range of barriers, such as

• Attitudinal, for example among disabled people themselves and among employers, health professionals and service providers;

• Policy, resulting from policy design and delivery, which do not take disabled people into account;

• Physical, for example through the design of the built environment, transport systems, etc.; and

• Those linked to empowerment, as a result of which disabled people are not listened to, consulted or involved.

The cumulative effect of these barriers is to marginalise disabled people from the mainstream of society and the economy. Removal of these barriers is key to empowering disabled people, and giving them the opportunity to exercise their responsibilities as citizens – in the home, in the community and in the workplace.

It is time to end the culture of dependency and low expectations, and move towards a society in which we invest in disabled people, empowering and supporting them to participate and be included.’

In the past, disability has almost exclusively been defined in medical terms, within a medical model framework. So the experience of disabled people, whether children, young people or adults, is perceived through a medical understanding of disability. In its crudest form, the medical model describes people solely in terms of their individual medical condition and resulting limitation(s). It puts labels on disabled people – someone with Multiple Sclerosis or Downs Syndrome for example - and nothing more. These labels become the starting point for professional assessments that fundamentally affect disabled people and their life chances. However, knowing that someone has MS tells a housing provider nothing about what kind of home she/he needs whether it should be fully wheelchair accessible or not, or whether minor adaptations such as handrails are required. Whereas if the housing provider knows that a person is unable to manage the steps at the front door or needs an extra room for a carer to stay

- 40 -

overnight, then housing options can be considered as to how the person would want to overcome the problem.

Such labels have and still do affect housing policy and practice, as demonstrated by the continued use of the term “medical” and use of medical practitioners as verifiers of disabled people’s housing needs. Though fewer professionals working with disabled people use a purely medical perspective, assumptions are still made based on medical definitions. This is contrary to a holistic, person centred approach that is at the heart of the social model, making disability a civil rights issue.

- 41 -

Appendix 2 Methodology

Summary

A survey of social landlords across London provided valuable information on current allocations policies and practice for disabled people and this was followed up with a full consultation exercise with disabled people and social landlords. A number of small-scale pilots were used to develop and evaluate a tool-kit including property checklists and standardised property accessibility categories and provide training to housing professionals on their use. The research also included structured interviews with a broad range of private sector housing providers.

A Disabled Persons Advisory Group (DPAG) with representation from disabled people across London was also set up and the feedback from this group was invaluable in ensuring that the views of disabled people were fed into the development of the London AHR.

London AHR online survey of social landlords

An online survey of the 33 London boroughs and a sample of 30 housing associations was carried out in order to collect information about current allocations policies and practice in relation to disabled people and to raise awareness of and encourage commitment to the London AHR project. The survey of 30 housing associations was stratified to ensure inclusion of all types of provider (for example, large, small, specialist, general needs, older people, BAME (black, Asian and minority ethnic and voluntary transfer housing associations..

Twenty-seven London boroughs, and nineteen housing associations responded giving a response rate of 82% and 63% respectively. A number of factors contributed to achieving this good response rate, including the use of an on-line survey and the efforts of the project team to develop named contacts and explain the project to each social landlord in the survey. The survey played an important role in publicising the project, promoting its goals and encouraging boroughs and housing associations to become involved in the project.

Consultation with housing providers

The project also undertook consultation with London boroughs and housing associations through a series of meetings attended by over fifty senior housing officers covering London’s five housing sub-regions. These meetings provided opportunities to present the case for a London AHR as well as to hear any concerns from the boroughs and housing associations. The project team also addressed the G15 group of housing associations, a conference of housing officers in South East London, the London Occupational Therapist Managers meeting, and the College of Occupational Therapists specialist section in Housing.

In depth work was also undertaken with housing officers and occupational therapists to consult specifically on the proposed accessible property categories and the proposed methods to collect this data. Sixteen housing providers attended these meetings. Meetings also took place with both HomeBuy agents for intermediate housing in London (Metropolitan Home Ownership and Tower Homes), two private developers (Barratts

- 42 -

and Bryant Homes), two specialist private estate agents and the National Landlords Association.

Piloting elements of the London AHR

Pilots were set up to evaluate the methods and tools created by the project and to ensure their effectiveness and usability. Ten housing providers piloted the property toolkit. A training session took place prior to the commencement of the pilot to ensure that all the officers that took part were provided with the expertise required to use the tools and methods. Feedback from the housing providers at the end of the pilot was used to evaluate and base amendments of the tools and methods. Two boroughs – Westminster and Barnet trialed a cross boundary swap of an accessible property using the tools and methods developed by the project.

- 43 -

Appendix 3 Accessible housing categorisation systems used in London Borough Accessible housing categories Specification Camden

• Wheelchair • Mobility • Standard

East London Letting Company

Disabled Adapted

Hackney

• Wheelchair standard • Lifetime Homes • General needs up to 5 steps

Harrow

• Use Locata West London Scheme Categories:- • Mobility 1 - wheelchair adapted or potential for wheelchair

adaptations (reasonably accessible to a full time wheelchair user - e.g. if can sleep in downstairs second living room and there are accessible bathing, washing and toilet facilities downstairs so person does not need to access the upstairs; otherwise whole property fully w/c accessible).

• Mobility 2 - accessible to a person with limited mobility who does not use a wheelchair all the time but may require major adaptations in the home such as a level access shower or stair lift because they cannot manage stairs or steps at all.

• Mobility 3 - accessible to a person who cannot manage stairs and steps at all.

Kensington and Chelsea

• WC1 - Fully wheelchair accessible – the property may be purpose built or fully adapted to wheelchair standards (with or without a lift x 2).

• WC2 - Partly wheelchair accessible – the property must have wheelchair accessible door widths, and complete level access (with or without a lift x 2). Some areas within the

• Wheelchair 1 (WC1) –Person uses a wheelchair permanently indoors and outdoors. Property needs to be wheelchair accessible to and throughout the property.

• Wheelchair 2 (WC2) – Person uses a

Borough Accessible housing categories Specification property may not be fully adapted e.g. Kitchen/bathroom, but must have adequate wheelchair turning circles in all rooms and hallways.

• Mob1 - Mobility standard – the property must be completely level to and throughout i.e. no steps at all (with or without a lift). Doors widths and hallways do not need to be as wide as for wheelchair standards.

• Mob2 - Semi-mobility standard – the property must be level throughout but may have up to 6 external steps (with or without a lift)

wheelchair indoors for some of the time, but able to walk and transfer to a limited extent. Wheelchair dependent outdoors. Access to the property needs to be wheelchair accessible and some internal areas may need to be wheelchair accessible. This will be recorded in the special needs comments section.

• Mobility 1 (Mob1) – Person does not use wheelchair and walks with difficulties. Unable to manage steps and stairs. Property needs to be level access to and throughout but not wheelchair accessible.

• Mobility 2 (Mob2) – Person does not use wheelchair, walks with difficulty but can manage up to six external steps. Will specifically noted in special needs comments if able to manage less than six steps.

• Mobility 3 (Mob 3) – Person can manage one flight of stairs (up to 20).

Lewisham

• Wheelchair • Wheelchair except for kitchen • Mobility • Adapted - suitable for future tenant • Adapted- suitable for current tenant only

Southwark

• Wheelchair properties with specialised kitchen • Wheelchair properties without specialised kitchen • Lifetime homes

- 45 -

Borough Accessible housing categories Specification • Individual adapted property.

Tower Hamlets • Wheelchair accessible - Purpose built to meet wheelchair housing standards

• Easy Access - Designed to be spacious. No steps to property. Suitable for some wheelchair users.

• Accessible general housing - Ordinary housing with no steps to property

• General housing - Does not meet requirements for the above categories.

• Not yet surveyed - Includes all properties that have not yet had an accessibility assessment

• Wheelchair Accessible – Independent, full-time, indoor user of a self-propelling wheelchair (8L), use of an indoor electric wheelchair e.g. EPIOC (electric powered indoor/outdoor chair), user requires a wide wheelchair turning circle (more than 1500mm to turn 180 degrees), user of a larger than standard indoor attendant-propelled wheelchair.

• Easy access – Person is unable to manage steps or climb stairs and at least one of the following criteria: user of a wide walking aid, indoor user of a standard attendant-propelling wheelchair (9l) or disabled child’s buggy, user of an indoor wheelchair who is able to stand and walk a few steps, for those who’s future housing needs are uncertain due to their prognosis

• Accessible General Housing – Person will fulfill one of the following criteria: unable to manage steps or climb stairs, user of a walking aid, for those whose future housing needs may change with time due to prognosis.

• General Housing – N/A. Waltham Forest • Cat A: full wheelchair housing - purpose built or adapted to

wheelchair standard with parking facilities • Cat B: part wheelchair housing - Level or ramped access

with wider doorways and passageways, no changes in level

• Cat A: Indoor and Outdoor Wheelchair Use – People who cannot stand or walk unassisted i.e. use a wheelchair most of the time indoors working in the

- 46 -

- 47 -

Borough Accessible housing categories Specification unless suitably ramped

• Cat C: level access housing - Ordinary ground floor accommodation with level access or a house adapted to provide level access e.g. provision of a stair lift

• Cat C Steps: housing with external steps - Ordinary ground floor accommodation with no more than 4 steps externally. Should be level internally, or housing with adaptations e.g. stair lift and no more than 4 steps

kitchen and in using the bathroom/toilet. This can also include people who are likely to become indoor wheelchair users in the near future.

• Cat B: Outdoor Wheelchair Use – People who do not need to use a wheelchair indoors or only occasionally/certain areas, but require one so outdoors. They would be unable to negotiate steps or stairs. Or people who need more space for safe mobility e.g. child with a large walking frame.

• Cat C: Ambulant with Walking Equipment – People who do not require to use a wheelchair indoors or outdoors but walk with difficulty i.e. have to use mobility aids and cannot climb steps or stairs. Can also include people who can manage and be safe using a stair lift.

• Cat C: Ambulant No Walking Equipment – People who have difficulty walking but could manage a few steps into a property. Can include people who can manage and be safe on a stair lift.

Housing associations

Accessible housing categories Specification

Christian Action Housing

• A: Wheelchair • B: Wheelchair access • C: Mobility standard

Community Housing

• Suitable for disabled clients • Adapted for disabled clients

Habinteg • Wheelchair housing

Borough Accessible housing categories Specification • Non wheelchair housing pre 1994 - accessible housing • Non wheelchair housing post 1994 - lifetime homes

Octavia Housing

• Wheelchair property • Fully adapted • Partially adapted

Poplar HARCA See Tower Hamlets categories Southern Housing Group

See Tower Hamlets categories

Swan HA • Accessible • Adapted • Fully adapted

- 48 -

Appendix 4 Property inspection checklist

TC

:430

9.X

XX

.001

.188

5

Accessible Housing Register ChecklistPlease complete for ALL properties

SECTION B For multiple identical properties (not including adaptations)complete property references on final page

Tick here if assessingmore than 1 property

Property Reference

SECTION A

Door No Street No Building Name

Estate Name Area

Your Phone Number Date of Inspection

Postcode Your Full Named d m m y y

Maisonette

SECTION C Tick all the relevant information in this section

1. General Information

2. Major Adaptions

Property Entrance Level:

House

H.Ass Name of Housing Association

Maisonette Private Rent Owner OccStudio Bungalow Council

Basement Other Please State:Ground

No. of lifts servicing the property:

No. of bed spaces:

0 1 2 3

1 2

Through floor lift: Y N

Ceiling track hoist: Y N

Step-lift: Y N

Stair-lift: Y N

Platform (stair) lift: Y N Level access shower: Y N

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

No. of bedrooms: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Flat

STOP NOW if the property entrance level is above or below ground floor AND the property is not serviced by a liftplease tick box

5. Communal Lift (assess only most useful lift for property)

YES (Complete 5)

NO (Go to 6)

InternalDimensions X cm

Lift ID

DoorOpening Width cm

SECTION D Tick all the relevant information in this section

4. Communal Ramp (assess only most useful communal ramp) Please tick against type of ramp

YES (Complete 4)

NO (Go to 5)

3. Communal Front Door

0 1 2 3

0 1 2 3

4+No. of steps (inc. thresholds of 10cm or more)from public path to the communal front door:

Is the height of thethreshold 2.0cm or less

YES (Complete 3)

NO (Go to 4)Y N Is the height of the threshold more then 2.0 cm

Door Opening Width cm

Y N

Platform at top of Ramp? Y N

aL cm

aH cm

a

aH cm

aL cm

bH cm

bL cm

a

b

aH cm

aL cm

bH cm

bL cm

ab

H

L

H=heightL=length

Number of Communal Lifts

SECTION E

8. Facilities on Access Level

YBed 1: N YLiving Room: NYSeparate Toilet: NYBathroom: NYBed 2: N

YKitchen: N YOther: N

9. Facilities Above Access Level

YBed 1: N YLiving Room: NYSeparate Toilet: NYBathroom: NYBed 2: N

YKitchen: N YOther: N

11. Internal Steps (Not including Stairs)

0 1 2 3 4+No of Internal Steps (Not including Stairs)

10. Facilities Below Access Level

YBed 1: N YLiving Room: NYSeparate Toilet: NYBathroom: NYBed 2: N

Y N Y NKitchen: Other:

13. Second Exit

Y2nd Exit: N YAccess from2nd Exit to Street N

No. of Stepsat 2nd Exit

12. Internal Stairs (to access other floors)

If Property has a through floor lift OR bedroom, bathroom, kitchen, living room on ground

floor go to 13

YStairs: N

Is there at least 70cm between bottom of stair and leading edge of front door? Y N

YStraightStairs: N Y

CurvedStairs: N

Width ofStairs:

SECTION D (continued) Tick all the relevant information in this section

0 1 2 3 4+No. of steps (inc. thresholds of 10cm or more)to the property front door:

6. Property Front Door

Is the height of thethreshold 2.0cm or less Y N

Is the height of thethreshold more then 2.0cm Y N Door Opening Width cm

7. Is Property Ramped (assess only most useful ramp for property) Please tick against type of ramp

Is the height of thethreshold 2.0cm or less Y N

Is the height of thethreshold more then 2.0cm Y N Door Opening Width cm

14. Ramped at Second Exit (assess only most useful ramp for property) Please tick against type of ramp

YES (Complete 7)

NO (ConsiderStatement below D)

aH cm

aL cm

bH cm

bL cm

a

b

aH cm

aL cm

bH cm

bL cm

ab

H=heightL=length

Platform at top of Ramp? Y N

a

aH cm

aL cm

STOP NOW if there are any steps AND no ramp at communal front door or property front

Door OR any internal steps (not including stairs) please tick box

H

L

YES (Complete 7)

NO (ConsiderStatement below D)

aH cm

aL cm

bH cm

bL cm

a

b

aH cm

aL cm

bH cm

bL cm

ab

H=heightL=length

Platform at top of Ramp? Y N

a

aH cm

aL cm

H

L

0 21 3 4+

TC

:430

9.X

XX

.001

.188

5

Y N UnsureProximity to local shops:Less than 100m

Y N Unsure DLR Bus Train TubeProximity to transport:Less than 100m (Tick which transport)

23. Proximity to Facilities

Y NCarport next to property? Y NDesignated parking bay?Y NCovered Carport?

22. Parking

Dimensions: x cm No. of Toilets

Space between midline of toilet and side wall (lateral space) cm

19. Separate Toilet (not outside)

YES (Complete 18)

NO (Go to 19)

Y NTurning space for awheelchair (130 x 150)

Y NL/A shower & bath: Y NBath (only): Y NBathroom nextto separate toilet? Y N

Combinedbathroom & toilet?

20. Bathroom

Dimensions of Bathroom: x cm

21. Door opening widths

Lounge: cm

Bathroom: cm

cmKitchen:

SeparateToilet: cm Bed 2: cm

cmBed 1:

Bed 3: cmcmBalcony:

Y NTurning space for awheelchair (150 x150) Y N

Larger turning space for wheelchair (170 x 140) Y N

431 2

Wheelchair accessible kitchen units

18. Kitchen

15. Access to Garden

YPrivate Garden: N YBalcony: N 10 2 3 4No. of Steps to Garden or Balcony:

SECTION F

SECTION E (continued)

16. Hallway

Hallway minimum width(exclude radiators): a Head on approach cm b Turn approach cm

YWheelchair charging facility:(Standard socket in storage space) N

17. Designated Wheelchair & Scooter Storage

Dimensions: x cmYes - Complete 16

No - Go to 17

STOP NOW If width of straight stairs is 64.9cm or less or curved stairs is 74.9cm or less. please tick box

STOP NOW If there is less than 70cm between bottom stair and leading edge of door

AND there is no 2nd exit that leads to the street. please tick box

COMMENTS

TC

:430

9.X

XX

.001

.188

5

Send Via PC Send Via Mobile

SECTION G

Property Reference 1: Property Reference 2:

Property Reference 3: Property Reference 4:

Property Reference 5: Property Reference 6:

Property Reference 7: Property Reference 8:

Property Reference 9: Property Reference 10:

Property Reference 11: Property Reference 12:

Property Reference 13: Property Reference 14:

Property Reference 15: Property Reference 16:

Property Reference 17: Property Reference 18:

Property Reference 19: Property Reference 20:

Property Reference 21: Property Reference 22:

Property Reference 23: Property Reference 24:

Property Reference 25: Property Reference 26:

Property Reference 27: Property Reference 28:

Property Reference 29: Property Reference 30:

Do Not Process

Property Reference 31: Property Reference 32:

Property Reference 33: Property Reference 34:

Property Reference 35: Property Reference 36:

Property Reference 37: Property Reference 38:

Property Reference 39: Property Reference 40:

Property Reference 41: Property Reference 42:

Property Reference 43: Property Reference 44:

Property Reference 45: Property Reference 46:

Property Reference 47: Property Reference 48:

Property Reference 49: Property Reference 50:

Property Reference 51: Property Reference 52:

Property Reference 53: Property Reference 54:

Property Reference 55: Property Reference 56:

Property Reference 57: Property Reference 58:

Property Reference 59: Property Reference 60:

Property Reference 61: Property Reference 62:

Property Reference 63: Property Reference 64:

TC

:430

9.X

XX

.001

.188

5

Appendix 5 Applying London AHR categories to new build housing Housing type General

needs housing

General needs housing

Lifetime Home

Lifetime Home

Property type Houses, flats, maisonettes, bungalows…………….

Property entrance level

Ground floor

1st floor and all other floors

Ground floor

1st floor and all other floors

No of lifts servicing property

0,1,2,3 + 1,2,3 + 0,1,2,3 + 1,2,3 +

London AHR Category

Cat D Cat D Cat C Cat C

No of lifts servicing property

0 0

LAHR Category

Cat. F

Cat F

Appendix 6 Flow chart for property categorisation

LAHR CATEGORY ATTRIBUTE RESULTING IN NO ACCESSIBLE

HOUSING CATEGORISATION

CHECKLIST & ROW DESCRIPTION

ATTRIBUTE RESULTING IN CATEGORISATION

HOW TO USE THE LAHR PROPERTY CATEGORISTION WORKFLOW TABLE The workflow table follows the same structure as the checklist. Using a completed property checklist, first check the attributes in the left hand column to see if your checklist is going to result in 'no accessible housing categorisation'. If not, then start at the top and systematically work down, comparing row by row the information on the checklist to the LAHR category columns, provided here, to see if all the attributes resulting in categorisation have been met and if so, for which LAHR categories. Use the shaded area on the right hand side of the checklist to note down the highest resulting category for each row. Attribute boxes which are shaded are for information only, and will not affect the categorisation of a property. As you work through the flowchart, once a property has gone down a category it cannot go back up i.e. if a property starts out as A, then drops to B, it can only remain as B,

d t C f th

A B C D

E

Above ground floor & no lift Ground floor no lift √

F

General H

ousing

√ √ √

√

1st floor and above, minimum 1 lift √ √ √ √

1st floor and above, minimum 2 lifts

√ Basement level with no lift & no ramp

Section C Row 1 General

information: Property entrance level

Basement with lift or ramp √ √ √ √ √

n/a

If property more than 1 storey it must have a wheelchair accessible through floor lift OR wheelchair accessible platform stair lift √

Section C Row 2 Major adaptations

Other adaptations are for information only

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Any communal steps & no communal ramp

No steps & threshold 1.5cm or less OR if property has steps there must be a ramp √ √ √ √ √

Threshold 1.5cm plus Door opening 75cm plus

√ √ √

Section D Row 3 Communal front

door

Door opening 80cm plus √ √

Ramp steeper than 1:12 (i.e. 1:11 or less)

Gradient no steeper than 1:12 on ramp less than 500cm in length, and ramp has a platform √ √ √ √ √

No platform at top of ramp (is a slope)

Gradient no steeper than 1:12 and ramp has a platform

√ √ √

Section D Row 4 Communal ramp

Gradient no steeper than 1:15 on ramp 500cm plus in length, and ramp has a platform

√ √

n/a

Section D Row 5 Communal lift

Wheelchair accessible: internal dimensions minimum 140x110cm AND door width minimum 80cm

√ √ √

Any steps & no ramp, except if there is an accessible second exit see Rows 12 and 13

No steps at the front door & threshold 1.5cm or less. If property has steps there must be a ramp

√ √ √ √

√

One or more internal steps Door opening width min 80cm

√ √

Section D Row 6 Property front door

Door opening width min 75cm

- 52 -

√ √ √

Ramp steeper than 1:12 (i.e. 1:11 or less)

Gradient no steeper than 1:12 on ramp less than 500cm, and ramp has a platform

√ √ √ √ √

No platform at top of ramp (is a slope) Gradient no steeper than 1:12, and ramp has a platform √ √

√

Ramp steeper than 1:15 (ie.1:14 or less)

Section D Row 7 Property ramp

Gradient no steeper than 1:15 on ramps 500cm plus, and ramp has a platform √ √

Section E Row 8 Facilities on access

level If property is a house or maisonette the bedroom, bathroom & living room must be on ground floor √ n/a

Section E Row 9 Facilities on floor

above access level

Facilities on the floor above the access level are for information only

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Section E

Row 10 Facilities on floor below access level

Facilities on the floor below the access level are for information only

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Section E

Row 11 Internal steps No internal steps (do not include main staircase)٭

√ √ √ √ √ One or more internal steps

General H

ousing

Properties without all Cat E attributes are Cat F: General Housing

If property bedroom, bathroom, kitchen, living room on ground floor then internal stairs are for information only

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

n/a Width of straight stairs 69.9 cm or less

Property with internal staircase & no through floor lift must have: - Width of straight stairs 70cm plus - Width of curved stairs 75cm plus √

√

Width of curved stairs 74.9mm or less

Section E Row 12 Internal stairs

Width of staircase 90cm plus √

Space between front door leading edge & bottom stair 69.9mm or less AND no access from 2nd exit to street

Section E Row 12 & 13 Internal Stairs & 2nd Exit٭٭

Space between front door leading edge & bottom stair 70cm minimum OR Space between front door leading edge & bottom stair 69.9cm or less AND 2nd exit provides access to street √ √

√ n/a If property has through floor lift 2nd exit is for information

only n/a n/a n/a n/a

n/a

n/a

- 53 -

If property has 1 step or more at the communal entrance and/or the property front door, AND the second exit has no steps OR has a ramp AND a threshold of 1.5cm or less٭٭٭ √

If property has 1 step or more at the communal entrance and/or the property front door, AND the second exit has no steps OR has a ramp AND a threshold of 1.5cm or less AND door opening width is 75cm or more √ √ √ n/a

Section E Row 14 Ramp at second

exit

Number of steps or ramp at 2nd exit is for information only

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Section E

Row 15 Access to garden or balcony

Garden or balcony access is for information only,

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a a) Head on approach (door at end of corridor) 90cm minimum width √ √ √ √ n/a b) Turn approach (door requiring 90° turn into room) 120cm minimum width √ √ √

Section F Row 16 Hallway

b) Turn approach 90cm minimum √

n/a Wheelchair storage space approximately 170 x 110cm minimum √

Section F Row 17

Designated wheelchair storage

Wheelchair storage space approximately 120x 70cm minimum √ n/a

Properties without all Cat E attributes are Cat F: General Housing

General H

ousing

Space Charging facility (electric socket) is for information only n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

n/a Wheelchair turning space 150 x 150cm minimum

√

Wheelchair turning space 170 x 140cm minimum √

Section F

- 54 -

Row 18 Kitchen

Wheelchair accessible kitchen units is for information only n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 4 bed space plus homes must have 2 separate toilets √ √

n/a

4 bed space plus homes must have 1 separate wheelchair accessible toilet sized 2.8m² with lateral space (midline of toilet seat to side wall) 100cm minimum √

n/a

6 bed space plus homes must have 2 toilets - 1 must be wheelchair accessible and sized 170x140cm (2.38m²) with lateral space (midline of toilet seat to side wall) 100cm minimum √ √

n/a Lateral space (from midline of toilet seat to side wall) 100cm minimum √ √ √

n/a

Section F Row 19 Separate toilet

All houses and maisonettes with 3 bedrooms or more, and all dwellings on the ground floor must have a toilet on the access level √ √ √

n/a Wheelchair turning space 150 x 150 cm minimum

√ √ √

n/a

Section F Row 20 Bathroom

If bathroom and toilet are separate they must be next to each other √٭٭٭٭

n/a If all other essential attributes met then majority of internal door widths should be 75 cm minimum √ √

n/a

Section F Row 21 Internal door

opening widths

If all other essential attributes met then majority of internal door widths should be 77.5cm minimum √ √

n/a Ground floor covered parking (carport) next to ground floor property √ √

Section F Row 22 Parking

Designated parking bay for 1st floor or above property √

n/a

Section F Row 23 Proximity to

facilities

Proximity to transport and shops is for information only

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a KEY A = Wheelchair Accessible B = Other Wheelchair Accessible C =Lifetime Home D = Easy Access E = Step-Free F= General Housing √ a property must have this attribute to be given this category. If a property has all but one of the attributes for a particular category it DOES NOT qualify for that category. ٭ Only refer to individual steps or a short flight of 2 or 3 steps, i.e. where there a minimal change in floor level, which would affect access ٭٭ Denotes properties with potential for stair lift installation ٭٭٭ Highlights properties that may not have an accessible front door but have an accessible second exit, which could be used as the main entrance

Properties without all Cat E attributes are Cat F: General Housing

General H

ousing

.Highlights E properties, which are general housing, and may have small bathrooms and separate toilet where a knock through may be possible in the future٭٭٭٭

- 55 -

Appendix 7 Project participants Home Connections project team Ninesh Muthiah, Chief Executive, Home Connections Mandy Ruddock, Senior Housing Occupational Therapist, L.B. Tower Hamlets Virginia Shaw, Director, Grunden Consulting Chantal Lee-Gan, Project Officer, Home Connections Independent disability advisers to the GLA Adrian Edwards Ramya de Silva London AHR Steering Group Isabel Robertson, Greater London Authority (Chair) Bola Abisogun, Accessible Advice Ieuan ApRees, Capital Moves (from June 2007) Leonard Asamoah, London Borough of Croydon Simi Awosika, Greater London Authority (Secretariat) Pat Bhabha, Waltham Forest Association of Disabled People Kirsten Firth, London Councils Julie Fleck, Greater London Authority Paul Gamble, Habinteg Housing Association (until December 2006) Rosy Leigh, London Borough of Harrow (from November 2006) Debra Levison, Greater London Authority Terry Middleditch, Bexley Access Group and representative from DPAG David Morris, Senior Policy Adviser to the Mayor of London (Disability) Steve Ongeri, Housing Corporation (until September 2006) Jacquel Runnalls, London Borough of Waltham Forest Nigel Thornton, London Borough of Barnet Hilary Wright, London Borough of Harrow (until November 2006) Andrew Young, Habinteg Housing Association (from December 2006)

Members of Disabled Persons Advisory Group Christina Adjei, Islington Disability Action Nicky Baker, Harrow Association of Disabled People

- 56 -

Sally Dixon, Disability in Camden Mary Driscoll, Bexley Association of Disabled People Robin Hunter, Disability Croydon Marcia Jones, Campaign for Independent Living, Lewisham Elizabeth Kemp, London Borough of Hillingdon Peter Kemp, London Borough of Hillingdon Barbara Leighton, City of London Access Group Katherine MacGinnis, DPAG Member Carol Mew, LDC Terry Middleditch, Bexley Access Group Musarat Mustafa, ADP what is the ADP Jean Pikette, Croydon Disability Forum Denise Smith, Campaign for Independent Living, Lewisham Carol Smoker, Disabled Tenants and Residents Ass (DATRA) Terry Middleditch, Bexley Access Group London Accessible Housing Register survey respondents Housing associations Emmanuel Adeyosoye, Islington and Shoreditch Housing Association Ltd Saroj Bains, Metropolitan Housing Trust Karen Birch, Hyde Housing Josephine Birungi, Ekaya Housing Association Ltd Gaye Brown, SWAN Housing Association Tim Bryant, Newlon Housing Trust Clare Canning, Chisel Ltd Paul Coates, Community Housing Association Helen Day, Southern Housing Group Patrice Eriata, Kush Housing Association Ltd Sandra Fawcett, Mosaic Housing Association Theresa Ferebee, Peabody Trust Marie Gerald, Ujima HA Ltd Duncan Howard, SPH Housing Chris Ingram, Look Ahead Housing and Care Ltd Ricky Kasabai, Stadium Housing Association

Russell Thomas, London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

- 57 -

Maeve MacAvock, Octavia Housing and Care Mojisola Makinde, St Mungos Ian Martin, Christian Action (Enfield) HA Ltd Hayley Mulhall, Waltham Forest HA Ltd Russell Purvis, Soho HA Sylvia Quansah-George, Labo Housing Association Jim Sheeran, Innisfree HA Christine Simpson, Women's Pioneer Housing Ltd Stuart Veysey, Bethnal Green and Victoria Park HA Les Whittaker, Bourne HS Ltd London boroughs Leonard Asamoah, London Borough of Croydon Pat Brindle, Corporation of London D Carter, London Borough of Hillingdon Steve Chalcraft, London Borough of Hounslow Helen Clitheroe, London Borough of Brent Helen Davies, London Borough of Sutton Jan Gilbert, London Borough Hammersmith and Fulham Rosalind Gill, London Borough of Greenwich Jacky Guddoy, Royal Borough of Kingston Rafiqul Hoque, London Borough of Tower Hamlets Rosy Leigh, London Borough of Harrow Julia Lim, London Borough of Lewisham Helen Manning, London Borough of Hackney Sue Marsh, London Borough of Bromley Council Liz Mason, London Borough of Havering Paul Murrell, East London Lettings Company Julie Newsam, London Borough of Camden Cora Nicholls, London Borough of Islington Sally Nott, Westminster City Council Jane Robinson, London Borough of Richmond Geoff Savill, London Borough of Newham Coral Sewell, London Borough of Greenwich John Sykes, London Borough of Merton

- 58 -

Jo Whitehouse, Royal Borough Kensington and Chelsea Pilot forums Karen Birch, Hyde Housing Association Shelley Campbell, London Borough of Harrow Helen Day, Southern Housing Group Mike Eneli, Bethnal Green and Victoria Housing Association Tricia Faiers, London Borough of Croydon Helen George, Habinteg Housing Association Rosalind Gill, London Borough of Greenwich Rosy Leigh, London Borough of Harrow Helen Manning, London Borough of Hackney Jane Patterson, Hyde Housing Association Jacquel Runnalls, London Borough of Waltham Forest Neil Stedman, Borough of Camden Nigel Thornton, London Borough of Barnet Jo Whitehouse, Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea Christina Wise, London Councils Andrew Young, Habinteg Housing Association Participants in London AHR in pilot of property inspection checklist and London AHR property categorisation system Ariana Beatty, Metropolitan Housing Partnership Lorretta Bergman, SWAN Housing Association Shellian Campbell, London Borough of Harrow Kevin Coleman, London Borough of Brent Trevor Dodd, London Borough of Greenwich Sue Foster, London Borough of Ealing Jan Gilbert, London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham Tom Harding, Hexagon Housing Association John Harkin, London Borough of Tower Hamlets Sandra Harris, Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea Paul Johnson, Southern Housing Group Linda, Louise Perry, London Borough of Sutton Helen Manning, London Borough of Hackney Vin Olley, London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

- 59 -

Jane Patterson, Hyde Housing Association Jacquel Runnalls, London Borough of Waltham Forest Yogesh Sharma, London Borough of Redbridge Neil Stedman, London Borough of Camden Audrey Sutherland, Poplar HARCA

- 60 -

Endnotes

1 Mayor of London, Housing Choice for Disabled Londoners, September 2007 2 Virginia Shaw A Perfect Match – A Good Practice Guide to Disability Housing Registers – Housing Corporation 2005 3 London Plan policy 3A.4 requires London boroughs to include in their Local Development Plans targets to ensure that 10% of all new housing is either wheelchair accessible or easily adaptable for residents who are wheelchair users. 4 Disability Rights Commission, Doing the Duty – An Overview of the Disability Equality Duty in the Public Sector, which came into force on 4 December 2006 http://www.drc.org.uk/docs/Doing_the-duty.doc 5 GLA, Draft SPG, Planning for Equality and Diversity in London, The London Plan, December 2006 p59 6 GLA, London and Sub Regional Strategy Support Studies, July 2005 7 It is acknowledged in the report that these definitions, which focus on impairment, are at odds with the social model of disability, but they are of necessity drawn from the categories used in the borough housing needs surveys. 8 Communities and Local Government, Allocation of Accommodation: Choice Based Lettings Code of Guidance for Local Housing Authorities, January 2007 9 GLA Accessible Living in London: A Feasibility Study for a Accessible Housing Register in London, November 2004 10 CLG Allocation of Accommodation: Choice Based Lettings Code of Guidance for Local Housing Authorities, January 2007 11 CLG Allocation of Accommodation: Choice Based Lettings. Code of Guidance for Local Housing Authorities Jan 2007 12 CLG Monitoring the longer-term impact of choice based lettings – October 2006 13 CLG Allocation of Accommodation: Choice Based Lettings Code of Guidance for Local Housing Authorities, January 2007 14 GLA, Wheelchair Accessible Housing Best Practice Guide for the London Plan, Sept 2007 15 Stephen Thorpe and Habinteg Housing Association Wheelchair Housing Design Guide 2nd Edition 2006 16 Housing Corporation Design and Quality Standards, April 2007 17 JRF Meeting Part M and Designing Lifetime Homes 1999 Hhttp://www.lifetimehomes.org.uk/H 18 Communities and Local Government, Code for Sustainable Homes, December 2006 19 Communities and Local Government, Allocation of Accommodation and Choice Based Lettings – Code of Guidance for Local Authorities – Consultation, January 2007 para 4.58 20 Hhttp://www.core.ac.uk/core/H CORE (Continuous Recording was set up in 1088 to record information on housing association lettings and sales in England. It was extended in 2004 to the local authority sector. It provides a national database on all lettings and sales of affordable housing, which can be used to examine issues such as affordability and ethnicity. In the future it will incorporate data fields to enable analysis of lettings to disabled people. 21 Available on website of South East London Housing Partnership – Accessible Homes Forum 22 Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit, Improving the Life Chances of Disabled People, January 2005