0:10 [Music]
0:13 right um to round off the afternoon then
0:16 what I wanted to do was
0:18 um go
0:22 through DFG decision making and uh it's
0:24 been mentioned a couple of times today
0:29 but just wanted to um go through with
0:31 you how you'd make a robust DFG decision
0:34 because what things that we often get
0:36 asked are can I give a DFG for this can
0:39 I give a DFG for that and it's it's kind
0:41 of really difficult to say just based on
0:45 on that kind of um thing the existence
0:47 of mandatory grants is extremely rare
0:49 and that Rarity illustrates that the
0:51 mindset of the decision-making Authority
0:53 must not be to search for Grants refuse
0:56 the grant but in good faith to limits ex
0:59 examination to the relevant matters so
1:01 this was from a case which I'll be
1:02 talking about in a few minutes time but
1:05 basically what the judge said was um
1:08 mandatory grants are very precious and
1:10 if you possibly can you should be trying
1:17 yes but sometimes you do have to say no
1:19 because not everything somebody applies
1:20 for is going to be
1:23 um relevant for for a DFG so going to go
1:26 through a little bit of case law looking
1:29 at how to make a decision on your on
1:30 your DFG
1:32 and this was first case which called
1:34 should I stay or should I go which was a
1:40 case from um Islington in in London and
1:43 this isn't the actual property but um
1:44 I've be told it looks fairly similar to
1:46 the to the property involved and it's
1:49 involved on Mrs McKuen who was um an
1:52 amput like amput and um she needed to
1:54 get in and out of this it's kind proy
1:56 down these steps that um that you can
1:59 see on screen here and her sons were
2:00 kind carrying her up and down in
2:02 wheelchair to get her in and out of the
2:04 in and out of the
2:08 property and she applied to Islington C
2:13 for a grant to construct a um a pad and
2:16 and to have a um a platform lift
2:18 installed on the kind of the edge of the
2:20 pavement here so she could then get up
2:22 and down from the pavement into the
2:26 property itself and Islington uh refused
2:28 the Grant application
2:31 application
2:34 um so what is Linton said was when when
2:37 we mq and applied for this grant was
2:40 that um and she she's a council tenant
2:43 and I said that there altern alternative
2:45 properties available that Mrs Muran can
2:48 move to um was about miles so
2:51 away I said it wasn't reasonable and
2:53 practicable to provide the lift um
2:56 partly because of the the cost of it and
2:57 they also said that the rest of the
3:00 property wouldn't be suitable that um
3:01 kind have access to the bedroom and the
3:03 bathroom actually when she got inside
3:05 the property was still going be quite
3:08 problematic so they refused the Grant on
3:10 those on that
3:14 basis and Mrs McAn then applied for
3:17 judici judicial
3:20 review so kind of the first issue was
3:22 well K can you refuse to adapt and
3:24 suggest a move
3:27 instead and what the Jude said was well
3:28 it's definitely good practice to have
3:30 that conversation and to look at the
3:32 Alternatives that that may be a better
3:36 outcome for people but you can't refuse
3:38 a valid DFG application just because you
3:41 as a local Authority think that there is
3:43 a better option out there if the uh if
3:45 the applicant
3:48 disagrees that that's from a DFG
3:50 perspective um what unfortunately
3:53 Islington didn't test was whether as a
3:55 social landlord they could withhold
3:57 permissions for the adaptations as they
4:01 believe it's not best use to their stock
4:04 um isn't didn't mention that in the case
4:06 but clearly what the judge said was that
4:09 from a DFG perspective and and in this
4:11 case Islington was both the DFG decision
4:14 maker and the landlord was that from a
4:17 DFG perspective you can't refuse a grant
4:18 just because you think there somebody
4:20 better somewhere better that somebody
4:27 to um and then I started looking at the
4:30 eligible Works um particularly the bit
4:32 about reasonable and
4:35 practicable and
4:37 um hopefully you go a minute that there
4:41 are kind of two stages to a DFG test for
4:43 eligible works first is do the works
4:45 meet the purposes which I will go
4:47 through in second which is a fairly
4:51 objective assessment and then are those
4:52 works that's and appropriate and
4:54 reasonable and practicable which is a
4:55 bit more
4:57 subjective which always depends on the
5:00 individual circumstances so you do have
5:04 to follow this process um if you're
5:06 going to make a robust decision what we'
5:08 come up with is this um come diagram to
5:11 hopefully try and explain to you how it
5:14 works so across the top there we have
5:16 the 12 purposes for which the grant must
5:18 be approved so things like access to the
5:20 home access to a bath access to wash
5:24 basin through to um better eating or
5:26 cooking making the home safer and access
5:29 to the Garden so for a grant to be
5:31 approve or for Works to be approved for
5:33 a grant um the adaptations you're
5:37 proposing must meet one of those
5:39 purposes then you look at whether it's
5:41 necess appropriate reason or
5:43 practicable um and if it all is then you
5:45 get your eligible work your proposed
5:48 Works turns into your eligible
5:51 work so for this case we had uh proposed
5:54 works of a steplift and I've used a
5:58 basketball analogy here so uh proposed steplift
6:00 steplift
6:02 does it meet the purpose of providing
6:07 access to the home I think based on um
6:09 fairly straightforward assessment of
6:11 that a
6:13 steplift meets the purpose of being
6:16 access to a home so usually that purpose
6:19 bits uh a slam dunk that's the that's
6:22 that's little analogy for you but then
6:26 in this case is the steplift then
6:27 necessary and
6:29 appropriate and reasonal and practi
6:32 iable and if you remember islon said it
6:38 practicable
6:41 but in terms of of this case and this
6:43 this was one of the key points of this
6:46 case what the Jude said was that when
6:48 you're assessing necessary and
6:49 appropriate and reasonable and
6:51 practicable you can only take into
6:54 account things associated with the
6:58 purpose that um you're examining so in
6:59 this case when you're assessing whether
7:02 it's Nation appropriate reason practical
7:05 in terms of access to the home you can't
7:08 consider access to the shower can't
7:09 consider access to the toilet can't
7:11 consider access to the bedroom when
7:13 you're making this decision so when
7:15 Islington said that the rest of the home
7:17 wasn't suitable for in terms of access
7:20 to those facilities the judge said that
7:22 didn't matter you can only judge
7:23 necessary appropriate Reas and
7:25 practicable in relation to the
7:27 particular purpose that you're looking
7:35 home so we'll come back to the um
7:37 reasonal and practical bit in a second
7:38 when I've been through this the second
7:41 case and this this was from Redbridge
7:44 and it was a tale of of two lifts so it
7:47 was um an adult son who still lived with
7:51 his his parents profoundly disabled had
7:53 a number of adaptations over the
7:56 years and um had a through floor lift to
7:59 get access to his bedroom and show room
8:02 which which were on the first floor um
8:06 had a few through floor lifts and um few
8:07 years ago one had broken down i' had it
8:10 replaced and the new one wasn't as
8:12 reliable as previous ones and a few
8:15 times had been broken down and to get
8:16 him back upstairs they rolled him up in
8:18 a a duve and kind of kind of dragged him
8:20 up the stairs to get back to his um
8:21 bedroom and chair room which which
8:25 obviously isn't um very suitable and
8:28 what they'd asked for was a
8:31 stairlift to act as a backup in any
8:34 situations where the through floor lift
8:36 BR down in the
8:40 future um so a health OT went in and did
8:43 the assessment and said it was n
8:46 inappropriate for a stairlift provided
8:49 as a backup to the through floor lift in
8:50 case it breaks
8:53 down the application on that basis went
8:57 to Redbridge Council who refused the uh
9:00 refused the application um from the G
9:03 reses based on um they could only they
9:04 said they can only provide one item of
9:08 equipment that's um per purpose and they
9:10 they've already had a through floor lift
9:13 uh to access the bedroom so that's one
9:16 piece of equipment ticked off they said
9:18 that a warranty and service plan were a
9:22 suitable alternative to the um to the
9:24 stairlift and and to be a provision in
9:27 case of breakdown and they said on that
9:30 basis it wasn't reasonable and practical
9:32 to award a DFG for a
9:35 stairlift and the family applied for
9:38 judicial review to challenge that
9:41 decision so again so this is kind of
9:43 getting onto the cruxs of necess
9:45 appropriate and reasonable practicable
9:47 in terms of deciding the eligible works
9:51 and this is directly from the the
9:53 legislation that the haing authority
9:56 should um look at whether they're
9:58 satisfied that the relevant works so in
10:01 this this case the stairlift was n
10:03 inappropriate and that it's reasonable
10:10 works
10:13 but they didn't take into account this
10:16 bit so the reasonable and practical part
10:19 of the test only has regard to the age
10:21 and condition of the dwelling so the
10:24 dwelling in this case was um perfectly
10:27 satisfactory condition so they couldn't
10:29 say it wasn't reasonable practical to
10:31 carry out the works because there wasn't
10:32 any issue with the age and condition of
10:35 the dwelling they had accepted the
10:38 health OES view that it was necessary
10:41 and appropriate um to have the stairlift
10:45 and so um there obviously their decision
10:46 to not award the grant based on
10:48 reasonable practicable was found to be
10:53 wrong and so um the G review was was
10:58 granted so I think this and I think this
11:01 is fairly common held
11:04 belief that social care or the O OT
11:07 decides what is necess and appropriate
11:08 and housing or the grants officer
11:11 decides what's reasonable and
11:13 practicable in terms of kind of common
11:16 customer practice with with the fgs and
11:19 what this case is clearly saying is that
11:22 that's not correct where the decision
11:26 making actually happens is that housing
11:28 it's it's kind housing or the grants
11:30 officers decision on what is necessary
11:32 and appropriate and the OTL social care
11:35 are the consultee in that process and
11:37 from the reasonal Practical element of
11:39 the decision in the vast majority of
11:41 cases where the house isn't Falling Down
11:44 is is pretty much
11:47 relevant so um just bring me back to one
11:49 of my hobby horses on why Social
11:51 Services still do have panel meetings
11:55 for um for dfg's or in panel meetings in
11:57 any case actually this is of Care Act
12:00 guidance which said that um panels
12:02 shouldn't be used for routine decisions
12:04 and if you consider that social care is
12:07 only consulty on DFG um I don't there's
12:09 any reason why there should be panels
12:12 for um for dfg's you may have meetings
12:15 around complex cases but routine panels
12:18 uh should be a of the
12:21 past so if reasonable and practicable
12:24 isn't a key element of making decision
12:27 on what is um inappropriate to approve
12:30 for a DFG then we do need to think about
12:34 net in appropriate a little bit more so
12:35 these are the guiding principles that
12:38 came from Francis Haywood did um about
12:41 20 years ago that we included in the DFG
12:44 guidance that that came out um two years
12:47 ago now but what we felt was kind of on
12:48 the base of the Redbridge case that we
12:51 needed to take this on another step and
12:53 um for any occupation therapists that
12:55 are watching I'm sure you beware the the
12:58 person environment occupation po model
12:59 which um
13:01 notot which I wen't going to explain but
13:03 we kind looked at that and started to
13:06 look at how we could use it to develop a
13:09 more um objective and useful assessment
13:11 tool for what is necess and appropriate
13:12 for a
13:15 DFG looking at things like bodily
13:17 functions roles and routines values and
13:19 beliefs and physical environment
13:22 economic issues social and cultural
13:24 issues and things that are due to a
13:26 disability considering the Alternatives
13:36 so that led us on to this
13:39 um framework in terms of how to make a
13:42 decision on what is necessary and
13:46 appropriate on any individual DFG
13:48 application um the intention with this
13:52 isn't that it's a um kind of tick boox
13:54 exercise the idea with this is it gives
13:57 you a range of kind of categories and
13:59 considerations that that you would think
14:02 about when you're looking at whether an
14:04 adaptation or application is necess
14:06 necessar and
14:09 appropriate so looking at whether it's
14:12 necessary um due to disability whether
14:14 there are suitable Alternatives that are
14:16 available as we can saw with the earlier
14:18 case moving somewhere else may not
14:21 necessarily be a reason to um refuse a
14:23 grant but there may be other
14:26 Alternatives so in the in the other case
14:28 providing a warranty and a service plan
14:30 May be considered a suitable alternative
14:33 under and appropriate to providing that
14:36 that second lift looking whether it's
14:39 long-term and a sustainable solution
14:42 third part of the necessary element and
14:43 then um looking whether it's appropriate
14:46 to person in terms of body functions
14:48 roles and routines values and beliefs
14:50 and whether it's appropriate to the
14:52 environment or kind of property so it's
14:54 minimizing barriers to Independence in
14:57 and around the home um reducing care
15:00 costs the economic element and that it
15:02 will meet the social and cultural needs
15:03 of the family
15:05 family
15:07 so as I say it's not designed to be a
15:10 checkbox it's a list of factors to be
15:11 considered when you're come to a
15:13 judgment on these
15:16 cases so if we go back to the two cases
15:18 we've looked at and kind of run through
15:19 the decision- making process again
15:23 thinking about this um this new tool I
15:26 think in terms of
15:29 um the steplift
15:31 thinking about the considerations in
15:33 terms of n in
15:35 appropriate I think they they you
15:38 probably tick all of those box a tick
15:40 box exercise but having a through floor
15:43 LIF sorry having a platform lift um
15:45 probably is necess in appropriate based
15:48 on that set of
15:52 criteria um so proposed steplift is the
15:54 slam dunk in terms of meeting access to the
15:55 the
15:57 home and then if we're solely looking at
15:59 access to the home home and considering
16:01 n and
16:05 appropriate then um for stairlift the
16:07 basketball would then pass that test and
16:11 go into your basket of of eligible
16:15 Works our survey said but still on the
16:17 understanding that the landlord in that
16:19 case Islington could have said no it's
16:22 not a suitable use of our stock um as
16:24 the landlord potentially but um that
16:27 wasn't C in case law and then kind of
16:30 thinking about the uh three lift stft
16:34 case I think I'm looking at suitable
16:36 Alternatives probably the warranty and
16:41 the um um backup so not backup the um
16:43 service plan are potentially better
16:45 alternatives to me the need it can be
16:48 done safely so
16:50 stairlift and the judge kind of did look
16:51 at the stairlift as making the home
16:53 safer rather come access to the bedroom
16:56 because it was already an existing lift
16:59 so having the stair lift as a backup
17:01 and not having the the sun dropped
17:03 upstairs in a duvet I think you can
17:04 fairly objectively say that would make
17:08 the home safer but because
17:11 um there is an alternative solution that
17:13 might be better it's not necessarily
17:15 necessary and appropriate to do
17:17 particularly in terms of just looking at
17:19 making the home safer so that
17:22 application doesn't necessarily proceed
17:29 inappropriate so I hope that gives you a
17:31 bit more of an overview on how you can use
17:33 use
17:36 um that new kind of tool and making
17:39 framework to make better decisions
17:42 around um some of the more kind complex
17:45 DFG um DFG applications that you might
17:48 see and if you go to the um DFG
17:51 decisions guide on our website we've
17:53 published a decision- making tool where
17:57 you can see all the details of that um
17:59 that's in framework I just shared with
18:02 you in a handy form format that you
18:04 could use for for particular cases
18:07 download that as a PDF and um test it
18:09 for a new case you come up with um
18:11 really be interested to hear how that
18:13 works for you and get some feedback on
18:15 on how you finding it on particular
18:17 cases um so yeah please do go and
18:19 download that and uh we' love to hear
