Purpose

This report seeks Cabinet approval to accept the Council’s allocation of the Crisis and Resilience Fund (CRF) and to agree the proposed delivery model for the period April 2026 to March 2029. The Crisis and Resilience Fund replaces the Household Support Fund and Discretionary Housing Payments, marking a national shift towards a more preventative approach that combines immediate crisis support with longer-term financial resilience. Newham has been allocated £24.6 million over three years.

The proposed delivery set out in the report focuses on an integrated, needs-based system led by Our Newham in partnership with council services and voluntary, community and faith sector organisations. It prioritises crisis support, homelessness prevention, and early intervention, while ensuring residents are connected to wider advice, income maximisation and resilience-building support.

Decision

For the reasons set out in this report and its appendices, Cabinet RESOLVED to Agree:

i)  To accept the Council’s allocation of the Crisis and Resilience Fund of £24,658,204 over three years.

ii)  The distribution of the Crisis and Resilience Fund via the approach as set out in Appendix 1.

iii)  To authorise the Corporate Director of Inclusive Economy and Housing, in consultation with the Lead member for Community Safety and Regeneration, to commence and undertake the roll out of the fund through the Our Newham service.

iv)  To approve the allocation of £1.5 million over the 3 years to support delivery of resilience advice. A procurement will be undertaken to commission VCFS organisations to deliver this advice.

v)  To delegate authority to the Corporate Director of Inclusive Economy and Housing to award contracts and agree any extensions for the delivery of resilience advice, following completion of the procurement process.

vi)  To delegate authority to the Corporate Director of Inclusive Economy and Housing to amend the allocations of the Crisis and Resilience Fund set out in Appendix 1, where necessary, to respond to demand, emerging priorities and operational considerations, within the approved total fund allocation.

Alternatives considered

1)  Officers have considered a range of delivery approaches for the implementation of the CRF and recommend the delivery model set out in this report as the most effective, compliant and value for money option.

2)  While local authorities have discretion in how the CRF is delivered, this discretion must operate within the framework of the DWP guidance (appendix 2). The guidance requires councils to move away from repeated short term crisis interventions and towards a needs based model that combines crisis support with preventative and resilience building activity, delivered in a cash first and accessible way.

3)  In light of this guidance, officers explored three broad delivery options.

Option 1 – A predominantly application based, council only crisis payment model - Under this option, residents would be informed of the CRF and invited to apply directly to the Council for crisis payments, with limited involvement from delivery partners.

This option is not recommended. Although simple in design, it carries a number of risks, including:

•  High and unmanaged demand, resulting in slower response times and potential reputational risk

•  A greater likelihood of supporting repeat crisis applications without addressing underlying causes

•  Reduced accessibility for digitally excluded or seldom engaged residents

•  Limited ability to link crisis payments to longer term resilience support, contrary to CRF objectives

Option 2 – Outsourcing delivery to a commercial provider - This option would involve procuring a third party provider to manage crisis payments and administration of the fund on the Council’s behalf.

This option is also not recommended. A commercial delivery model would:

•  Require a significant procurement exercise, reducing the time available for direct delivery

•  Increase costs, reducing the proportion of funding available for residents

•  Lack the local knowledge and trusted relationships necessary to reach Newham’s most vulnerable and diverse communities

•  Limit integration with existing council services and VCFS networks delivering preventative and resilience support

Option 3 – A cross council and cross partner delivery model integrating crisis support and resilience (preferred option) - This model builds on learning from the Household Support Fund while responding to the new requirements of the CRF. Delivery is led through Our Newham, working jointly with Children and Young People’s Services, Adults Services, Housing, Adult Social Care, Education and schools, and VCFS partners including the Newham Food Alliance.

This option enables:

•  Rapid, cash first crisis support delivered through multiple access routes

•  Active triage of residents into advice, income maximisation, arrears prevention and resilience services

•  Community based delivery through trusted VCFS partners

•  A managed transition away from universal provision, including school holiday food vouchers, without a cliff edge withdrawal of support

•  Flexible use of funding to respond to emerging pressures and changing patterns of demand

This paper recommends Option 3 as it best meets DWP grant conditions and guidance (Appendix 2), delivers the Council’s strategic priorities, provides value for money, and reduces the risk of repeat crisis demand by ensuring that crisis interventions are directly linked to longer term prevention and resilience.