Earlier this month, Cold Homes Week saw 170 organisations join forces to put pressure on the government to raise its game in the battle against fuel poverty.
Citing the 31,000 people in Britain who died last winter from the cold, along with the rising cost of poorly insulated homes, campaigners urged ministers to do more to make UK homes energy efficient.
The government has been active in this area, launching the ambitious Energy Company Obligation (Eco) and Green Deal initiatives, but for a myriad of reasons progress has been slow. And while parties on all sides debate, thousands of vulnerable people, often on low incomes, suffer the consequences of living in cold homes.
What they need is a fast and effective service that assesses their needs and effects the necessary work. And there is one.
Last winter, Foundations Independent Living Trust (FILT) co-ordinated a four-month programme funded by £500,000 from the Department of Health, which was designed to help vulnerable people at risk from cold-related harm and illness. Initial findings from an evaluation by Sheffield Hallam University of the FILT Warm Homes Service (FWHS) were released last autumn. The final report gives us a clear picture of why the service was successful and the lessons that can be drawn for future strategies to tackle fuel poverty and prevent illness caused by cold homes.
Work on the ground was delivered by 55 home improvement agencies in 160 local authority areas of England, assessing people’s needs and delivering a range of improvements, from better insulation to boiler repairs to draught proofing. More than 3,700 assessments were done and energy efficiency work carried out in over 1,000 homes. Crucially, work was executed on average within a month of assessment for three-quarters of households.
FWHS was both responsive and able to reach those most in need. This is partly down to the local nature of home improvement agencies and the fact that they have a track record. They are trusted, have a good reputation and are integrated into local support networks.
The other key factor is the hub and spoke model used. FILT – the charitable arm of home improvement agencies’ national body, Foundations – managed the Department of Health funding and was able to filter it down to the agencies quickly. To quote the evaluation report: “The flexibility and ‘light touch’ approach to the funding and administration allowed the agencies to work quickly with vulnerable households… Speed of response and lack of bureaucracy means the FWHS compares favourably with larger schemes such as Warm Front, Green Deal or Eco.”
The advent of the Green Deal and Eco has seen many energy companies launch their own programmes to deliver energy efficiency measures. In the context of supporting the most vulnerable in society, that is a big ask. FWHS was successful because it used a well-established, community-based network of organisations. People respond to home improvement agencies because they are viewed as a trusted and sensitive source of help.
As the evaluation says: “People reported feeling they were treated with respect, and did not feel judged. This was important as some clients described feeling guilty about needing and asking for help.”
FILT is now in discussions with energy firms to find ways to help them invest in initiatives that reach the most vulnerable. With a network of nearly 200 home improvement agencies, there is scope to deliver at scale. One of the key messages we are trying to get across in these conversations is the need for companies to take a more flexible stance, for example by part-funding measures. Too often we see blunt criteria applied – it is a free boiler or no boiler. But firms already have corporate social responsibility functions that give them the freedom to work differently.
By being creative and bold, energy companies can enable the agencies to unlock all the added value that a community-based approach can bring.
Home improvement agencies typically received between £2,000 and £6,000 to deliver FWHS, with a small number allocated more than £10,000. The FWHS evaluation showed they levered in at least an extra £2.10 for every £1 spent through their knowledge of grant schemes and other funding to carry out further work. Many clients were also referred on to other agencies such as Citizens Advice and GPs. It meant that through one assessment, the agencies were able to flag up and bring in help for numerous other issues such as debt problems and health concerns.
If energy firms want to invest in energy efficiency, they should welcome the chance to do it in a way that has a far broader impact on people’s lives. It is more cost-effective and generates value in terms of both PR and corporate social responsibility.
FILT Warm Homes Service: vital statistics
• FWHS reached 6,469 people during winter 2012/13
• 63 per cent of households had at least one person with mobility issues and 83% were over 60 years old
• More than a quarter of over-60s were experiencing worse health caused by cold homes
• 12 per cent had faulty heating and 34% had draughty doors or windows
• 69 per cent of work people had done was draught-proofing, low cost but high impact work – to draught proof a door or window costs around £30
• Of those referred on for further support, 88% were for further repairs/handyperson service, 41% to health providers and 40% to Citizens Advice Bureaux
• • 11% said they would like to investigate options to switch fuel supplier and were signposted to an independent website.
FWHS evaluation: www.filt.org.uk