Sheltered Housing Schemes

[William 29]

The FR levels would be similar either 60 or 30 min fire cells to each dwelling so not sure what Clevelandfire is getting at.  Would the heat detector if fitted be installed to protect the M of E and the stand alone part 6 in the dwelling to warn the occupant???

[Midland Retty]

You're not wrong William, I think that what Clevelandfire may have been elluding to was the fact that the smoke detector will activate first and hopefully prompt an action by the resident.

[AM]

I was talking to a local care provider this morning, and the nature of residential care is changing and a lot of services are provided in the client's own home, and dementia care units are being provided instead.

Playing devil's advocate here, a sheltered housing scheme is set up where an occupier owns or rents a flat, and when they move in they are ambulant etc. 10 years down the line, their site deteriorates, or they're waiting for a hip replacement etc - how is this different to anyone's private home - you can't stop someone from buying a house because sometime in the future someone may not be able to use the stairs. Fire safety legislation does not (and should not) impose controls within a single private dwelling, the only protection that should be provided is to protect the means of escape provided - ie compartmentation, or should the enforcing authorities evict someone from their own home on the basis of a risk assessment? If that person becomes so imobile that they cannot use the means of escape provided, than should it not be up the resident or the families to decide if that scheme is suitable place for that person to live - the same as any private home (any for people with any disability, not just age related). As it is someones's own home, is it the on-site staff's job to evacuate people? Or to assist those that have decided to evacuate? Depends upon the level of service provided. At least sheltered housing schemes usually have alarm systems that call a warden/monitoring service to allow the brigade to be called out if a detector goes off within a dwelling, which is arguably better than being in a bog standard tower block.

[jokar]

I agrre, the difficulty is if care is being provided to the resident by staff at the site, then the situation becomes a bit vague as to whether it is sheltered housing or a care facility.

[val]

AM ...or should the enforcing authorities evict someone from their own home on the basis of a risk assessment?

No FRS would attempt, or comtemplate that.

My view is that all the residents live in a communal building, each at risk, and posing a risk to all others in that building. They are therefore relevant people whilst in their accomodation by dint of being 'in the vicinity' and as we all agree, are relevant people when they step into the common areas. The type of tenancy is irrelevant. (This concept is enshrined in the HHSRS and Housing Act).

I agree with the view that these premises should be subject to registration under the Care Standards Act and the next one that gets shirty with me will be rewarded with a challenge to the NCSC (I think they have changed their name again), to demand registration.

There is a head of steam building up to start challenging the risk assessments, particularly those that accept 'stay-put' with no resident staff. Taken to its conclusion, this means that the Fire and Rescue Service becomes part of their evac plan.

[AM]

AM ...or should the enforcing authorities evict someone from their own home on the basis of a risk assessment?

No FRS would attempt, or comtemplate that.

My view is that all the residents live in a communal building, each at risk, and posing a risk to all others in that building. They are therefore relevant people whilst in their accomodation by dint of being 'in the vicinity' and as we all agree, are relevant people when they step into the common areas. The type of tenancy is irrelevant. (This concept is enshrined in the HHSRS and Housing Act).

I agree with the view that these premises should be subject to registration under the Care Standards Act and the next one that gets shirty with me will be rewarded with a challenge to the NCSC (I think they have changed their name again), to demand registration.

There is a head of steam building up to start challenging the risk assessments, particularly those that accept 'stay-put' with no resident staff. Taken to its conclusion, this means that the Fire and Rescue Service becomes part of their evac plan.

The question was rhetorical - I know no fire authority could attempt such a thing, but the question in the original post was regarding the position of wardens in a scheme where there are bedbound people in their own homes but the Responsible Person's duties only extend to common areas. These sites normally have an alarm system that is linked to a warden, so if there is an activation, is that warden supposed to go into that flat an evacuate the resident, whose condition they have no control over, from an area that they have no responsibility for? Or are they just supposed to call the FS and direct them to where the fire is?

[kurnal]

Many sheltered housing schemes were built by local authorities often to a poor design standard. One near me has a single open stair leading from communal entrance hall, kitchen and community room, the stair opens onto a landing at first floor level with two unprotected dead end corridors  serving flats each of 45m, with unprotected refuse stores off the corridor. Plain glazed panels to flat entrance doors, detection to L4 only. When it was built it had a resident warden, but now there is just a distant control room. I recommended enclosure, protection and alternative means of escape 25 years ago, it was costed but nothing has changed except the warden has been made redundant.

It frightens me that the politicians who dream up these extra care schemes have no idea as to the safety standards of some of these places. And if they did they probably wouldn't care.

[wee brian]

Its all a bit fuzzy these days, but a sheltered housing scheme is just a block of flats with knobs on.

Theres no difference between an old lady getting a visit once a day (or whatever) in her own flat or once a day in a sheltered housing complex.

I suppose the question that we need to ask is; if and when should a person be rehoused because they are unable to escape from the home they live in?

Many of them would object to being booted out of their homes and even if they didnt there problably isn't enough capacity in the res-care sector to take them.

[val]

Its all a bit fuzzy these days, but a sheltered housing scheme is just a block of flats with knobs on.

Theres no difference between an old lady getting a visit once a day (or whatever) in her own flat or once a day in a sheltered housing complex.

I suppose the question that we need to ask is; if and when should a person be rehoused because they are unable to escape from the home they live in?

Many of them would object to being booted out of their homes and even if they didnt there problably isn't enough capacity in the res-care sector to take them.

W B

Can't agree with you there. Not many blocks of flats have;

1. Furniture in the corridors
2. Lounge areas, some with kitchens
3. Such a high preportion of elderly, physically disabled, people with senility
4. Commercial companies offering a service, and making a profit to people described in 3 above

No-one is really asking them to be re-housed...only for the houses/flats they have to be made as safe as is reasonably practicable. There is often little or no difference in the risk to residents between sheltered housing and residential care...except there is no staff in the first.

[wee brian]

W B

Can't agree with you there. Not many blocks of flats have;

1. Furniture in the corridors
2. Lounge areas, some with kitchens
3. Such a high preportion of elderly, physically disabled, people with senility
4. Commercial companies offering a service, and making a profit to people described in 3 above

No-one is really asking them to be re-housed...only for the houses/flats they have to be made as safe as is reasonably practicable. There is often little or no difference in the risk to residents between sheltered housing and residential care...except there is no staff in the first.

1&2 are minor technical issues

1. Probably shouldnt be allowed.
2. Lots of blocks have shared facilities these days - gyms and all sorts - it aint hard to deal with.

3&4 are the sticky bits

As usual you seem to have it in for anybody who may make a profit - is everybody here a communist (not that that makes you a bad person)

The service they offer and what responsibility that incurs is the million dollar question. I think this comes down to who it is that decides that they should live there. If a care provider puts them there then they should only do that if the resident is modbile and able to look after themselves.

However in most cases the residents decide they want to live in sheltered accom. Perhaps in your police state these companies should refuse to house anybody who is unable to make their own escape and throw them into the street when they get a bit too old.

Theres nothing wrong with these buildings - but it is wrong for health authoriteas to use them as cheap care homes.

Sorry, that was a bit of a ramble - feel free to pick the bones out of it.

[Midland Retty]

Here'a another twist to the story....

How do you feel about a sheltered housing provider whom supplies its own carers to look after the residents on site but still class the premises as being sheltered.

This seems like its really pushing the boundaries.

What are you thoughts?

[nearlythere]

We are seeing a trend in our local area where sheltered housing providers are redesignating their schemes as being "very sheltered" or even "Very very sheltered".

As you will appreciate residents may have been in good health when they first purchased or rented an apartment in a scheme but overtime,as they have got older, their health has deteriorated and outside carers have been brought in to look after them.

Alot of residents seem to have almost 24 hour care, Some residents are bed bound!

It just seems to me very sheltered schemes are in a sense "residential care on the cheap"

In some cases sheltered schemes look more like residential care homes nowadays and this leads me onto my question.

Often sheltered schemes are manned by a warden monday to friday between 9 and 5

In very sheltered schemes do you expect the warden or scheme providers to be looking at assisting the evacuation of bed bound residents or residents who's mobility would impare them from evacuating qucikly enough.

Private residents in their own homes can also get outside carers in, sometimes for up to 24hr. Is this an area we want to poke our noses into also? If a resident in a block of flats gets a carers attention for a few hours a day does that make it a relevant building.
Please stop trying to regulate the world.
Sheltered/Fold schemes do not require wardens. The residents are not in care.

[wee brian]

Blimey - somebody on my side!

I think there is a bit of "mission creep" with some of these places - maybe somebody ought to get a grip. Trouble is that things can be counter productive. Sheltered accom is better than a normal flat so we dont want to make these schemes unviable.

[Midland Retty]

Please stop trying to regulate the world.
Sheltered/Fold schemes do not require wardens. The residents are not in care.

Im not Im gathering opinion Nearlythere

Been to a sheltered scheme where third party care isn't provided instead its provided directly by the same people who operated the sheltered scheme, to me theyre res care on the cheap.

Not only that all the residents are bed bound, and in thirty minute fire resisting compartments which I think is ridiculous

[Midland Retty]

Sheltered accom is better than a normal flat so we dont want to make these schemes unviable.

Wee Brian I expected more from you!

Flats and maisonettes should have 1 hr fire compartmentation, sheltered schemes dont.

Ordinarily not a problem, but where all residents are bed bound Im starting to think someone is taking the mickey a little bit personally. If they're bed bound and no one is available to assist them you would want atleast 60 minutes FR in my view.

I dont want to regulate the world, but firefighters wont be able to rescue that many residents who are bed bound. Thats my primary concern.