URL: https://democracy.sheffield.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=4653

Decision Maker: Housing Policy Committee

Outcome: Recommendations Approved

Is Key Decision?: Yes

Is Callable In?: No

Purpose:

Content: 11.1 The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director of Neighbourhood Services which sought permission to recommission and re-procure a five-year contract for a psychology service that provides reflective practice and case formulation support to staff working with homeless individuals who have experienced complex trauma.     11.2 RESOLVED: That the Housing Policy Committee:- (a)  Approves the re-commission and re-procurement of a psychology service to provide reflective practice and case formulation support to staff working in commissioned services and internal homelessness services over a period of 5 years, for a core contract value of £97,068 per year (£485,340 total contract value). (b)  Approves the distribution of additional income as set out in section 1.3. of Appendix 1 attached to the report. (c)  Records its concern at the proposed closure of the therapy service for women in supported accommodation.   (NOTE: Part (c) was agreed unanimously.  For parts (a) and (b) the result of the vote on the resolution was FOR - 6 Members; AGAINST - 1 Member; ABSTENTION – 0 Members). .     11.2.1 Councillor Paul Turpin asked for his vote against parts (a) and (b) of the resolution to be recorded     11.3 Reasons for Decision     11.3.1 The current service ends on 9th May 2026. The service supports staff in statutory internal Homelessness services and commissioned supported accommodation services to respond to the needs of the complex clients they work with, through clinical and psychologically informed intervention. The service also supports wider organisational objectives. Failure to recommission the contract could potentially result in reduced staff wellbeing/morale, increased service refusals and evictions, alongside a less trauma-informed approach being taken across commissioned and internal services.         11.4 Alternatives Considered and Rejected     11.4.1 Alternative Option 1 - Don’t recommission and lose provision As explored above, not having this service would create risk and potentially result in: reduced staff wellbeing/morale, increased service refusals and evictions, alongside a less trauma-informed approach being taken across commissioned and internal services. This could increase the pressure on TA and the use of B&B accommodation.     11.4.2 Alternative Option 2 – Commission the service internally from another service area, or another statutory service, which may be more familiar with delivering similar services e.g. Adult Social Care or NHS. ·       It would be difficult to get the level of expertise in other services that are operating that balance knowledge of comorbidity of homelessness and multiple disadvantage alongside clinical expertise.  ·       There is a benefit to the service being delivered independently of the Council. Staff have said they find the sessions a ‘safe space’ where they can discuss issues around workload, and that it’s valuable to have this provided by a service that is separate from the council.     11.4.3 Alternative Option 3 – Deliver the service ourselves ·       A job description would need to be developed. ·       The employee would need access to clinical supervision in addition to line manager supervision and there is not an obvious alignment with existing teams. As with option 2, there is a benefit to the service being delivered independently of the Council. ·       This option is likely to be less cost effective and flexible than externally procuring the service. The proposed arrangement means that it would be possible for the Council to use external funding to enhance provision quickly.      

Date of Decision: September 18, 2025