CIH Northern Ireland response to Housing Executive’s draft Supporting People Strategic Intent 2026-2031

CIH Northern Ireland believes that strategic aim one (closing the gap) is the fundamental priority upon which the success of the Strategic Intent depends.

As detailed in our "Agenda for Change" (August 2024), Northern Ireland is facing an unprecedented housing and homelessness crisis. The Strategic Intent document itself acknowledges that initial findings from the 2025 Strategic Needs Assessment (SNA) indicate a “material increase in the gap between need and supply” since 2020. Addressing this disparity is the most urgent challenge facing the sector.

While we strongly support the focus on ‘improved outcomes’ (aim two), these outcomes can only be realised if people can access the services they need. Without closing the supply gap, thousands of vulnerable people remain at risk of homelessness, hospitalisation or breakdown of independent living, which undermines the ‘prevention first’ agenda for which we advocate.

We welcome the commitment to a robust SNA to identify needs by theme/category and geography. For us, a data-driven understanding of the gap is the essential first step to securing the sustained, long-term investment we have called for in our previous budget responses.
Closing the gap (aim one) cannot be achieved by the Housing Executive in isolation; it requires a multi-agency approach that CIH Northern Ireland champions, making aim four (collaboration) a crucial mechanism for the strategy’s success.

To summarise, while all four aims are interrelated, aim one addresses the core systemic failure – the lack of adequate support capacity – that currently prevents the SP programme from fully meeting its vision of improving lives for all who need it.

Yes, we find the four strategic aims and their associated short-to-medium-term priorities to be clearly defined and well-structured. The mapping of specific actions – such as the SNA and the revision of the outcomes framework – to the broader strategic goals provides a transparent roadmap for the SP programme’s modernisation.

While recognising that statutory and funding frameworks are outwith the Housing Executive’s scope, we make the following observations:

• We note that much of the Strategic Intent describes the process of reform (the SP modernisation project). To ensure the document functions as a true strategy, it will be vital for NIHE to translate the outworkings of the SNA into clear strategic choices. Defining these intended outcomes more specifically will help providers understand the long-term direction of travel and allow the sector to make proactive decisions on where to focus investment and innovation.
• We support the use of the SNA to identify gaps by theme/category and geography. However, “working towards closing the gap” must result in clear, time-bound targets for service expansion. Given that initial data indicates a “material increase” in need since 2020, this aim is only appropriate if it is used to leverage the sustained, multi-year funding settlements we consistently advocate for, rather than overreliance on year-to-year funding and monitoring rounds.
• We consider aim four - collaboration with health and justice – to be essential. This aim is highly appropriate as it reflects our call for a ‘whole-of-government’ approach. However, collaboration must go beyond strategic alignment and move toward joint commissioning and shared budgetary responsibility, reflecting the significant savings SP services deliver for the health and justice sectors. For example, the 2015 report “The Financial Benefits of the Supporting People Programme in Northern Ireland” commissioned by the Northern Ireland Council for Voluntary Action found that “every £1 spent on the SP services saves the public purse £1.90” (p.6), with savings realised across areas including health service and crime costs. 
• While improving outcomes is an appropriate aim, we also believe these should be aligned with a statutory duty to prevent homelessness.

The aims provide a robust foundation, but their success will be measured by whether they can transition the SP programme to be better aligned with strategic prevention and associated outcomes, backed by long-term financial security.

Yes. While CIH Northern Ireland welcomes the priorities identified – particularly the commitment to a robust, evidence-led SNA – we believe addressing the following dependencies and opportunities will help close the gap:

• We note that the findings of the 2025 SNA will be a key determinant of future priorities. Given that this analysis is ongoing, there is an opportunity for NIHE to provide ‘interim strategic guidance’ to the sector. This would ensure that, while we wait for the full outworkings of the SNA, providers can continue to make informed decisions on service development and resource allocation for the immediate 2026/27 period.
• The SNA should specifically analyse the viability of rural and regional services. These services often struggle to achieve the economies of scale found in more populated areas. Closing the gap requires a nuanced funding approach that ensures rural service users have the same access to support as those in urban centres, preventing a ‘postcode lottery’ for independent living and ensuring these vital community-based services remain viable.
• An additional barrier to closing the gap is the lack of move-on accommodation. There is opportunity to better align social housing delivery with SP needs – we recommend an action to ensure that SHDP targets are informed by the SNA findings to ensure a more fluid transition from support to more independent living. This is important in the context of future allocations of specialised homes being made through a separate process outside the housing selection scheme.
• We acknowledge that several critical factors, such as statutory frameworks and overall funding settlements, sit within the remit of the Department for Communities (DfC) and the Northern Ireland Executive rather than NIHE alone. However, we believe the Strategic Intent should be used as a proactive platform to influence these areas, ensuring that the ‘closing the gap’ aim is supported by the necessary legislative and fiscal shifts.

Yes. While we note that co-design is mentioned for the young people framework, we believe there is an opportunity to embed lived experience as a feature of outcome evaluation for all service types.

This ensures that services users themselves help define success, reflecting the “person-centred philosophy” mentioned in the vision. To deliver this, we recommend that NIHE look to the model established in the recent National Plan to End Homelessness (December 2025).

Specifically, the lived experience forum report for that plan outlines how insights from those with direct experience of homelessness and support services are not just used for initial consultation, but continue as a permanent part of the strategy’s accountability framework. We believe a similar forum group in Northern Ireland would provide the necessary oversight to ensure that the improved outcomes under aim two are being realised in practice and that the system remains responsive to the changing needs of those it serves.

CIH Northern Ireland welcomes the acknowledgement in the Strategic Intent that the four strategic aims were developed by “listening to the lived experiences of service users”. It is an important foundation to ensure that the voices of people supported by the programme have shaped the high-level strategy from the outset.

To ensure this initial engagement is built upon effectively, we suggest that this prioritisation of lived experience be carried through the lifecycle of the 2026-2031, including through the following actions:

• Engage a permanent ‘lived experience advisory panel’ for the SP programme; this would ensure that service users are not just consulted on intent, but are active partners in the modernisation project, particularly in the redesign of the outcomes framework (aim two)
• Incorporate longitudinal storytelling and ‘distance travelled’ tools; these methods capture the nuanced, relational progress people make – such as improved confidence or re-engagement with healthcare – which can be accurate predictors of long-term housing stability
• To close the gap (aim one), NIHE should continue developing its understanding of why some people disengage from services; we recommend a specific project to capture the lived experience of those who have cycled through or been excluded from the system – this data would be helpful for remodelling services to be more accessible and inclusive.

Yes. We support the intent to “drive financial efficiency and agility”, and we believe that efficiency must be balanced with sustainability. For aim three to be successfully delivered, we offer additional opportunities and actions for consideration:

• To deliver the ‘agile’ mission stated in the vision, we suggest that the review of governance (priority five) should specifically look at how contract management and grant terms can be made more flexible. True agility is often found in the ability to tailor support to the person; therefore, we recommend an action to ensure that efficiency does not lead to overly rigid service definitions that hinder the individually tailored support the programme aims to provide.
• Priority three mentions “financial modelling scenarios”. CIH Northern Ireland recommends that these models are not developed in isolation. There is a vital opportunity for provider co-production throughout this process. Delivery partners hold the granular data on operational costs and real-world financial pressures; involving them in the modelling phase will ensure that the resulting financial strategies are both realistic and robust.
• We seek further detail on what is meant by “revised criteria”. While we support streamlining, we wish to see a clear commitment that these revisions will account for the actual, rising costs of service delivery – including professional staff training, mental health support for workers and increased Employer National Insurance contributions.
• As NIHE seeks to use ‘progressive commissions’, CIH Northern Ireland recommends that aim three include a commitment to transparently report the social return on investment (SROI). By quantifying the financial value created for the community and across government departments, NIHE can better defend the programme's budget during Executive-level negotiations.
• CIH Northern Ireland supports the exploration of flexible service and funding models. We believe this provides an opportunity to move toward pooled budgets or joint commissioning with health and justice. Since SP delivers significant savings to these departments, a more agile funding model would involve more shared financial responsibility, ensuring that the efficiency of the SP programme is recognised as a saving for the entire public purse.
• Regarding the priority to “maximise grant funding toward frontline service delivery”, we believe it is essential to define what constitutes frontline costs. Management and administrative overheads are often essential for safety, quality assurance and staff wellbeing; reducing these arbitrarily in the name of efficiency could jeopardise service sustainability.

Yes. CIH Northern Ireland considers strategic aim four – collaboration – to be an essential mechanism for the long-term sustainability of the SP programme. While we welcome the priorities listed, particularly the focus on cross-departmental alignment, we believe the following additional actions will help translate collaboration into tangible service improvements:

• Collaboration should not just be top-down between departments; it must include the delivery partners. We recommend an action to co-develop a ‘housing support professionalisation strategy’ with providers and CIH. This would aim to standardise training and qualifications across the sector, ensuring that the “high quality agile services” mentioned in the mission are delivered by a workforce with a shared professional identity.
• Priority four mentions ensuring the programme is prioritised at ministerial levels. To achieve this, per our response to question 12, NIHE could lead a specific action to publish a formal SROI report in partnership with statutory stakeholders. Quantifying the millions of pounds saved for the health and justice sectors through housing support is an effective way to secure the prioritisation mentioned in the Strategic Intent.

Furthermore, since priority one focuses on strategic alignment with government departments, we state again would like to see formal joint commissioning and pooled budget frameworks, particularly with the Department of Health (DoH). Given that SP services prevent hospitalisation and institutional care, the financial responsibility for these services should be shared by the departments that reap the greatest budgetary savings from them.

CIH Northern Ireland identifies the following as the most significant challenges to the successful delivery of the Strategic Intent 2026-2031:

• ‘Flat-cash’ funding cycle – the most immediate threat to all four strategic aims is the continued reliance on reasonably flat-cash budget settlements. This creates a cliff edge for providers, making it difficult to commit to the long-term service expansion required to close the gap (aim one). While recognising the welcome budget proposal to retain uplifts provided for in recent years, without an ambitious uplift in funding, the strategic intent remains vulnerable to the cost of rising wages and short-term budget pressures.
• Workforce depletion and recruitment – the housing support sector is facing issues in recruitment and retention driven in part by sub-inflationary pay levels. If the SP grant does not evolve to allow for competitive, professional salaries, the ‘agility’ and ‘quality’ of services (aim two) will inevitably decline as experienced staff leave for better-funded sectors.
• Absence of ‘move-on’ pathway – strategic aim one (closing the gap) cannot be achieved in a vacuum. The chronic shortage of social housing starts – which we warn are currently far below the required 2,200 per year – means that many people are not in the most appropriate accommodation for their needs, which also prevents other service users from accessing the right support. This may continue regardless of how efficient the SP programme itself becomes.
• Disproportionate funding burden on housing – while strategic aim four focusses on collaboration, the current NI Executive structure (while acknowledging the greater strategic focus on housing in recent years) can lead to ‘siloed’ budgeting. The challenge lies in ensuring that DoH and the Department of Justice move beyond strategic alignment to a suitable financial contribution, reflecting the millions in savings the SP programme generates for their respective budgets. The 2021 Housing Executive report “Social Return on Investment Study – Supporting People Programme” identifies “important value and cost savings for multiple stakeholders” (p.52) while focussing on the broader social value of the SP programme.
• Legislative lag – we believe that a statutory duty to prevent homelessness is important to underpin this strategy. The challenge is the potential for a policy gap where the Strategic Intent moves toward a prevention first model, but the underlying legal framework remains reactive and crisis-focussed, limiting the Housing Executive’s ability to intervene early.

While the Strategic Intent is a welcome and professional roadmap, its delivery is contingent on shifting the SP programme from less emergency intervention to more long-term infrastructure, backed by the wider NI Executive.

Crucially, for aim four (collaboration) to be realised, we need to see the findings of the SP SNAs reflected directly within the strategic needs assessments and service plans of health and justice. Integrating housing support data into the commissioning cycles of these partners will, in turn, provide a robust evidence base to assess and secure a proportionate level of funding contribution from these departments, reflecting the cross-cutting value the programme delivers.

Yes, subject to the recommendations raised in our responses to the other consultation questions.

CIH Northern Ireland acknowledges that NIHE has an established and professional administrative framework for the SP Programme. That said, the governance arrangements for 2026-2031 will be strengthened if they evolve to tackle the systemic challenges currently facing the sector. For governance to be truly effective, we believe it must be strengthened by the context in which it operates.

Yes. While the Strategic Intent outlines a positive framework for collaboration, CIH Northern Ireland believes there is scope to deepen stakeholder contribution during the delivery phase (2026-2031) to ensure the programme remains agile and evidence-based. We suggest the following areas for enhanced contribution:

• To build on the ‘listening’ that has occurred to date, there is scope to transition from consultation to active co-production. Per our response to question 11 we recommend engaging with a permanent lived experience panel that contributes directly to the design and testing of the updated SP outcomes framework (aim two, priority three). This ensures that success is in part defined by those who use the services.
• As the professional body for housing, CIH can contribute significant expertise in developing professional standards and training frameworks. Per our response to question 13, there is scope for a more formal partnership between NIHE and CIH to ensure that the SP modernisation project aligns with broader professional housing standards across the UK and Ireland.
• Beyond service design, there is significant scope for stakeholders to contribute to the modernisation of the programme’s financial architecture. We recommend that a dedicated working group of providers and sector specialists be established to co-produce the “revised criteria for eligible costs” and the “value for money” framework mentioned under aim three. This ensures that administrative agility is designed by those who must navigate these systems daily, leading to more effective and less burdensome governance.

Yes. While CIH Northern Ireland supports the vision of the Strategic Intent, we believe several external and systemic risks could obstruct its successful delivery. Per our response to question 14, these include:

• Flat-cash funding trap: The single greatest obstacle to aim three (financial efficiency) and aim one (closing the gap) is the continued reliance on non-inflationary funding settlements. We have repeatedly warned that flat-cash is effectively a cut in real terms. Without an inflationary uplift, providers cannot risk the capital or long-term recruitment necessary to expand services.
• Move-on stagnation: The effectiveness of SP is dependent on a healthy wider housing system. The chronic undersupply of social housing (which we estimate requires at least 2,200 new starts per year) creates a bottleneck where people have evolving housing needs but few options to meet those needs. This prevents closing the gap due to a mismatch of support needs.
• Workforce depletion: There is a critical risk that the backbone of the SP programme – its workforce – will erode. Low pay, driven by stagnant grant levels, has led to issues in recruitment and retention. If this is not addressed, the high-quality delivery mentioned in the vision will be harder to sustain as experienced staff leave for other sectors. 
• Siloed policy environment: Given the way SP is structured and financed, there is a risk that it will continue to be viewed as a ‘housing-only’ financial responsibility.

We have no further comments or feedback to provide regarding the Strategic Intent document at this time.

For more information on our response please contact Justin Cartwright CIHCM, national director Northern Ireland, justin.cartwright@cih.org.