Agenda item

The Director of Finance submits a report providing the Commission with an overview of the historical context of The Furniture Bank pilot scheme and advising of future sustainable options for awarding furniture for vulnerable low-income households in crisis.  The Commission is recommended to receive the report and make any comments and/or observations that it sees fit.

The Director of Finance submitted a report providing the Commission with an overview of the historical context of The Furniture Bank pilot scheme and advising of future sustainable options for awarding furniture for vulnerable low-income households in crisis.

The Head of Revenues and Customer Support introduced the report, reminding the Commission that the Furniture Bank scheme had been run as a pilot project for about 2 years.  This had delivered 3,000 pieces of furniture to homes in the city and over the last year had avoided 77 tonnes of waste being sent to landfill.

However, the scheme was not sustainable in its pilot form, so the Leicestershire and Rutland Reuse Network (LRRN) had become the Council’s new charitable partners.  It was recognised that, in the current climate of making financial savings, support to households needed to be sustainable.  This new venture therefore expanded on the current partnership arrangement.  It also offered other charitable organisations in the city the opportunity to join the LRRN and help more households in need.

A dedicated webpage was being developed.  This would list the current partners, (Sofa Loughborough, Work link project and React local), provide a contact telephone number and explain what sort of reusable pieces of furniture they accepted.  It was anticipated that this website would be available from 23 September 2016.

Councillor Waddington, (Assistant City Mayor with responsibility for Jobs and Skills), noted that various issues had arisen in the running of the pilot scheme.  Having considered options for the future operation of the scheme, the Executive had agreed that the most suitable option was to work with the voluntary sector.  It also was recognised that people would like to be able to see the furniture before selecting it.

Councillor Waddington also noted that voluntary organisations did not provide items that were provided new, (such as white goods).  These were sourced through existing Council contracts.

The Commission welcomed the proposals, but queried whether the LRRN would be able to meet demand, particularly if this rose.  In reply, Councillor Waddington confirmed that analysis of items provided under the pilot scheme and what was likely to be needed in the future showed that demand would be met with the improved collection service to be offered.

The Head of Revenues and Customer Support confirmed this, explaining that previously there had only been a small team of people working on the pilot project.  Staff absences had made it difficult to provide a full service at times, so little promotion of the scheme had been undertaken.  It also had meant that it had only been possible to make approximately 30 collections of donated furniture per week. 

Although it was anticipated that doing future collections of donated furniture through the Bulky Waste Collection service would be more productive, there would be a “soft” launch of this service, to enable the number of referrals received and the number of furniture donations made to be monitored.  If the scheme was successful, a “hard” launch would be undertaken in 2017, probably involving sending information to households with Council Tax bills in the spring.

Currently, anyone referred to the scheme would be given a telephone number through which to contact the scheme.  This number would go through to any of the participating charities, who would organise collection of the item needed and transfer it to the warehouse.  As this was done by telephone, any of the participating charities could be a first point of contact, irrespective of their geographical location or core group of clients.  The charity would then refer the case to the LRRN, who would deliver the item.  In the future, donors would be asked to contact charities direct and anyone known to be in need of the items donated would be contacted by the charities.

Feedback from the pilot project showed that recipients would like to be able to see the items available and have an element of choice in what they received.  There currently was no “showroom”, but the feasibility of providing one was being considered.  At present, all available furniture was displayed on the LRRN website and choices were made from this.

In reply to questions, the Head of Revenues and Customer Support advised that:

·           The revised scheme had been established through a procurement exercise.  It therefore would operate under a contract with specific terms and conditions;

·           The finding of volunteers for this scheme was not the Council’s responsibility.  The LRRN had a pool of volunteers they used;

·           Items classed as luxury goods could not be supplied through this scheme.  This meant that televisions could not be provided;

·           Successes of the pilot project included the provision of three fully furnished homes in December 2015 for refugees to the city.  This was achieved through close partnership working with LOROS furniture shops and other sources within the Council, (such as using items from care homes that were closing down); and

·           The contract under which the Council obtained new items was separate to that for the Furniture Bank.  A year on year increase in the amount available for the purchase of these items had been included in that contract.

In reply to questions from Members, the Waste Management Service Development Manager confirmed that improvements had been made to the IT infrastructure, to reduce problems such as slow internet access.  However, without significant financial investment in to the IT system, the scale of improvements possible was limited.

The Commission confirmed its support for this project and suggested that Option 3 in the report was preferable, having the most sustainable delivery plan.  However, Members felt that some element of choice and/or ability to upgrade the furniture received would benefit the scheme and the way in which it was perceived.

AGREED:

1)    That the report be noted; and

2)    That a report on the operation of the revised Furniture Bank scheme be submitted to this Commission in one year’s time.