• Home
• Who we are
• What we do
• Client case studies
• Good Practice
• Links
• Contact us
• Text only

• Return to main page

return to client page

ONE RURAL COMMUNITY'S VISION

A Case Study on Fundraising for
Abbeyfield UK - Esk Moors

Written by John & Georgina Truscott
Abbeyfield Esk Moors Society

INTRODUCTION

This report describes a unique project designed to help older people to remain within their community, in a remote area of the North York Moors, as they find increasing difficulty in coping in their own homes.

The project is three-pronged:

• sheltered residential accommodation for up to 18 people in double and single flats
• a community care centre to cater for up to sixty clients a week
• outreach help to enable people to continue living in their own homes if they so wish.

The driving force for the project, over the past seven years, has derived almost entirely from within the community. This has been a tremendous source of strength to the project, and is being widely seen as a very attractive model for other similar projects, but has also presented great difficulties in identifying and securing the resources and support to convert the community vision into reality.

As of January 2005, the project has secured around £2M of the approximately £2.75M needed for completion. Building should start in mid 2005, and a project worker is already in place, developing the services to be operated from the centre.

The report is in three distinct sections:

• A story, as told by a family, illustrating their hopes and fears for the care and comfort of the parents in their old age. This is based upon a series of recorded interviews of older people in one small village.
• Explanation of how a group of local people came to recognise the needs of older people for help to remain within the community as they became more frail and less able to stay in their own homes, and an account of the progress to date.
• A personal view of the problems faced in progressing the project from the 'grass roots', and of the lessons for the future.

top

---

1999: Tom

"My name is Tom. I am 84 years old, and me and my wife Annie live in our two bedroom terraced cottage in a small village on the moors. It's been my wife's home since she was two years old, and mine since we were married in 1951, when I moved in with her and her father. She moved into it with her parents from the village mill in 1921.

I was born in the village but when we were courting I was shepherding in the next valley, and had to walk a fair way over the moor to see Annie. As a fit young man it wasn't much trouble to me to build a stone footbridge over a beck on the way over, so I didn't get my feet so wet! Then I got a horse. Then a bicycle. We've had good times and bad. We haven't been away from home. We don't have holidays - mind you, as children we did have little holidays with our grandparents on the valley side. I didn't go away to war because farming was a reserved occupation. Very few around here did because of that.

Farms don't pay now - the young chaps can't make a living at it any more. I'm getting worried now about the future. I've not been too good these past few months. Annie's not been walking well for years now. If anything was to happen to me, who would help her get her shoes on and get her safely down the stairs? They're steep in our cottage. We get bad winters up here. It's cold without a fire. She wouldn't be able to empty the ashes or bring the coals in for the fire, so how would she keep warm?

Mrs next door gave up running the post office in 1994 - well they let her go on until she was 74, but she'd had enough, and there isn't a post office now. It's a job getting our pensions. We don't drive or have a car - not many our age do around here. I get a lift from a neighbour most weeks to the post office in the next village, two and a bit miles away. That's where the nearest shop is, and the pub.

Annie doesn't get out. What would happen to Annie if I was to die? What if she fell down? She's done that a few times. It's better since we got a telephone installed, a couple of years ago, but Annie can't get the hang of using it.

People have to go to the town, eighteen miles away, to live in a home. She wouldn't like that. She's never spent a night away from home. Friends can't get there to visit. If I get put in the hospital there she won't be able to visit me. There isn't a bus comes near. I wouldn't be able to visit her if she had to go to hospital, either, unless somebody gave me a lift. Our son lives away - there's no work around here for him, so there's not much he can do for us. And we don't want to leave home. As long as we can manage..."

2004: Annie

"My husband Tom died in 2000. The Millennium. I have to get by without him. I get worried.

My next-door neighbour looks after me when she can. She can't be here all the time, but she sees me safe downstairs in the mornings and back up to bed. And lights my fire and brings the coal in. Oh, and she brings me a bit of dinner or supper on the five days we don't get meals on wheels. Of course she's 84, like me, but she's a bit fitter, though she does have trouble with her eyes.

The trouble is she can't help me with a bath, and it costs me six pounds every time I do, because it's miles from the town for the carer people to come. I don't ask for help more than I have to. But things are getting difficult. If it weren't for my neighbour I would be even more lonely now Tom's gone, and I wouldn't feel safe, falling and so on.

People round here depend on their neighbours. My son can't get here often because he's working. I'm getting a bit much for my neighbour. I don't want to leave my home, go away from the people and place I know, and live in a town.

I don't know how long I can manage at home. What will I do?"

2004: Their son

"I've seen so many older folk from the villages on the moors have to be moved to Whitby when they can't cope on their own - they don't last there. It's so different, and they've never had any experience of living away from the moors and valleys and the people they know. People don't visit, it's too far and the roads are bad, so they lose touch. They don't adapt. They just fade away pretty quickly, they're so miserable.

I don't want my mother to go through that. She wouldn't manage here in my flat in the city. I shall have to give up my job and go to live with her to look after her. There's not much work to be had there, though, and even if I could find a job there's no day care centre for her to go to, or anything like that. Mobile phones don't work in some parts. My mother isn't managing in her cottage. I'll have to think what to do..."

The names have been changed, but these are real people.
The experiences described are exactly those of many families
in this moorland area of 'Rural Isolation'.

Now: A neighbour (an incomer)

"Ever since we came here fourteen years ago we've felt welcomed - though incomers are everyone whose grandparents are not natives of the area! We were welcomed as 'new blood' in a quiet rural community where jobs were disappearing and young people were leaving with them. Now, as incomers have re-invigorated society and re-established facilities, sons and daughters with their young families have been returning.

Incomers are still relatively few here but soon the balance will tip and a way of life little changed for generations will have vanished. As demand increases from outside the area for holiday and retirement cottages on the moors, property values are escalating.

Local people are kind, proud, private and straight-speaking. I was gladly included in village life, helping to organise the church fete and the Mell Supper. I joined the wives and mothers at the Mothers' Union and the Yorkshire Countrywomen's Association in the next village, and was blessed by warm friendship from the older women.

In the year 2000 I was honoured to be allowed to record several life stories, including one from which the above stories are taken. Each life story took hours to assimilate on audio-tape and even longer to set down. I gave these back to the families so that they would have a record of a way of life that is gone. The stories gave me some understanding and a great respect for my friends. My older neighbours have helped me through hard times, and I have sorrowed for them in theirs.

Then my husband and I heard of a group of people - volunteers who, in their own kitchens, cooked the 'Meals on Wheels' and then distributed them through the villages and farms at this upper end of the Esk Valley to the older people. They, too, were distressed when their 'customers' disappeared to be taken care of in Whitby, knowing very often that they would never return.

They also were concerned when elderly friends had to be taken by ambulance uncomfortable miles over twisty, narrow, steep roads for physio treatment, occupational therapy, chiropody, anything to do with outpatient care (though we do have two excellent GP practices in the 60 square miles of this end of the valley). Day care is too far away, so some of the 'Meals on Wheels' volunteers and other people from the valley set up weekly social clubs for the old people in a few village halls.

It isn't enough. Friends are being lost. Friends who have been the pattern, the very being of tradition and culture in this remote moorland landscape. So the community is doing something about it! Something HAS to be done. So a voluntary committee was formed which has been named 'Esk Moors Action for the Elderly'. We wanted to help, joined them, and… here we are!"

top

---

THE STORY OF THE PROJECT

Early Thinking and Research

The story of Tom and Annie is an example of the situation which in 1997 prompted concerned local people in the Upper Esk Valley to form 'Esk Moors Action for the Elderly' (EMAE). The group included lifelong residents of the valley with a deep understanding of the community, working alongside other long-term residents who brought a range of skills from their professional careers. They met simply to think about the problems they saw of older people becoming unable to remain in the community.

Their first task was to carry out a household survey asking older people whether they thought a care home was needed in the area. There was a 55% response, and 90% of the respondents thought there was such a need, although the precise need was ill-defined.

At this point the project had its first injection of expertise from the outside world, in the form of Lyn Enzor from Help the Aged, who recognised the need to undertake more rigorous research of the needs of the population. She also helped to find the funding for this work, as EMAE at this point had little money, and was just beginning to organise social events, both to raise some funds and to attract further interest in the valley.

This Action Research project, funded by Help the Aged, NYCC and Yorkshire Forward, collected information about the circumstances, needs, hopes and aspirations of older people in the valley. Of all those aged over sixty, 77% were interviewed individually in their homes and a key element of this work was to advise individuals on benefits and services available to them. This work resulted in the document: 'Sixty Years Plus in Moorland Yorkshire - Report of the Survey of Older People in the Upper Esk Valley'. Most of the older people interviewed said that they would like, with help, to remain in their homes for as long as possible, but that if they had to leave their homes they would like to stay in their local area.

This research took a year to complete, and was undertaken on behalf of EMAE by Whitby Disablement Action Group. In commissioning this work, EMAE realised that it did not have the resources available to administer and payroll such a project, and that there were very distinct advantages in placing the contract with an organisation rather than with individuals - this thinking was also reflected in subsequent decisions, such as the employment of a Development Agent.

The publication of the report, in mid 2000, was marked by the holding of a half-day Workshop, in Danby village hall, to which all the potential partners in the emerging project were invited. These included the Scarborough Borough Council Housing Department, North Yorkshire Social Services, the National Park Authority and the local Primary Care Trust as well as local GPs and councillors. Most of these bodies had already been involved in informal discussions, but this was a key event in the formation of the partnerships which were to become so crucial to the progress of the project.

top

Professional Support

In the course of the Action Research programme it became clear that the project was now taking a more permanent shape, and had transformed itself from a wish to a commitment. The EMAE committee realised that they needed to enlist more professional support for the project.

Once it became clear that a significant building construction project was necessary, they approached Bradford and Northern Housing Association (now known as Accent Homes) who agreed to become managing agents for the construction aspects. Bradford and Northern HA undertook these responsibilities on an 'at risk' basis, and continued to do so for an extended period, for which EMAE is extremely grateful.

It was also recognised that the undertaking to operate a residential house as an independent voluntary committee was not feasible in the long term, and EMAE applied to form the Abbeyfield Esk Moors Society, as an independent charity affiliated to The Abbeyfield Society. The national Abbeyfield Society then gave strong support to the development proposals, and together, Bradford and Northern HA, Abbeyfield and the local committee began to prepare a bid for a Social Housing Grant to the Housing Corporation.

The Care Plan

One major outcome from the Danby Workshop in July 2000 was the suggestion from Seamus Breen, then Social Services Community Care Manager for North Yorkshire, that a Care Plan should be prepared to set out in some detail the needs of the older population and how they could be met. One member of the EMAE committee had professional experience with community projects, and undertook to prepare such a plan, which was published in early 2002, under the title 'A Care Plan for Older People in the Upper Esk Valley'. This document identified 42 key issues, many of which need to be resolved through partnership agencies, to provide an integrated care service.

As a result of the Care Plan study the project now incorporated a Community Care Centre in addition to the twelve flats already envisaged in the residential house. This Centre was both to provide day care facilities and to offer a range of outreach services to help people remain in their own homes as long as possible. This development was encouraged by Abbeyfield as fitting their recent thinking on offering 'integrated care'.

Two significant moves were seen as crucial to starting the whole programme - Housing Corporation approval for the Abbeyfield residential housing project, and funding for a Project Officer to lead the Care Plan partnership. The application process for the former was already in hand. An application to the North Yorkshire Single Regeneration Budget for three years' funding for the Project Officer was successful, and the post was filled in late 2003.

top

Finding a Site - Planning Approval

In the early stages of the project EMAE became aware that the 5 Year Plan for The North York Moors National Park Authority was at the public consultation stage, and that it contained no provision for sheltered housing, and appeared to accept that older people in need of such accommodation would have to leave the area. Successful representations were made to include a provision in the long term plans - a vital preparatory step to a subsequent planning application to the National Parks Planning Authority.

The search for a suitable site took some considerable time. EMAE invited offers of potential sites to be purchased from local landowners, and a number of suggestions were received from which a short-list was drawn up based on assessment against an agreed set of criteria, such as access, proximity to services, aspect, etc. The planning authority was also asked to comment informally on each site, as the planning application for such a large new building in the National Park would inevitably be a significant event.

The site eventually selected, following a geological survey, was one of the very rare 'brown field' sites in the area, near the railway at Castleton, the largest village in the upper end of the valley. As a result of the Care Plan study the building was now to include day care facilities in addition to the twelve residential flats. The development agent at Bradford and Northern HA engaged an architect, Burns Architects, who have also worked 'at risk' for the project, to prepare plans which were discussed with Abbeyfield Esk Moors. Planning approval was granted with the full backing of the planning authority, subject to the expected restrictions such as using local stone.

The photograph (above right) shows the view towards the site from across the valley, with an artist's impression of how the new building will look. The small inset shows the new brown-field site at Castleton. The residential flats will enjoy this south facing view across the valley.

Bid for Social Housing Grant

The first bid for Social Housing Grant, made to the Housing Corporation in the autumn of 2002, provided the project with its first major setback. It was thought that all the work had been done, all necessary boxes ticked and conditions met in completion of the application. The bid apparently had the requisite level of support from Scarborough Borough Council. In early 2003 it was learned that not only had the bid not been successful - it had apparently barely warranted serious consideration.

It was agreed that there was no alternative to submitting another bid in October 2003, as without a Social Housing Grant there was no realistic chance of being able to raise the necessary funds for the project, which now stood at about £2.2M.

Preliminary discussions with the Housing Corporation, including a visit to the site by the Investment Manager, proved helpful and encouraging, as well as throwing up some additional problems. The site visit was arranged to demonstrate the rural isolation of the project, as the initial reaction had been that the unit costs of the residential element of the building, which the Housing Corporation could support, were extremely high.

The explanation of these unit costs lies in a combination of environmental factors arising from being within the National Park, remoteness of the site from sources of construction labour and materials, and the small number of units required. Nonetheless the Housing Corporation also required that the floor area of the flats, and hence the cost, should be further increased to provide added flexibility in possible future use of the building. It also became clear in these discussions that the Abbeyfield Esk Moors Society would no longer be able to achieve Registered Social Landlord status under new guidelines, and nor could the bid be submitted by proxy, using Bradford and Northern status. This resulted in an inevitable decision by Abbeyfield Esk Moors to apply to join Abbeyfield UK an established registered social landlord, the newly formed society within The Abbeyfield Society. This move removed the option previously taken by the Esk Moors society to retain its legal independent entity until the reality of Abbeyfield UK became clearer.

A group of local committee members had been invited to contribute a presentation on the project at a Help the Aged 'Village Voice' conference in the late summer of 2003. In the course of that conference a great deal of helpful advice was offered by delegates from the Countryside Agency, HACT, Help the Aged and others, on the need to find advocates and supporters for the next bid to the Housing Corporation. This led to a major effort in lobbying all the relevant local authorities and agencies, at both elected representative and officer levels in support of the bid.

No sooner had this campaign been started than a further major problem presented itself. It became apparent that the Housing Corporation would not accept a bid from the project unless it was guaranteed support from the North Yorkshire Supporting People team. Abbeyfield Esk Moors Society had previously registered as a 'pipeline' application, but as there was no operating house in place, that application could not be translated into a fully substantive bid. The Supporting People team was unable to offer any support, and so the whole project was in jeopardy.

It was decided that the only effective response to this impasse was for a delegation to go down to Westminster to meet the local MP, Lawrie Quinn, who already knew of and supported the project. Lawrie Quinn responded splendidly and within quite a short time a deal was reached in which North Yorkshire Social Services underwrote any Supporting People funding for the project. In the meantime, all the appropriate letters being prepared in the lobbying campaign had been revised to include the details of the further problems over Supporting People funding.

The responses received from these letters were overall very encouraging and supportive, with politely guarded replies coming only from those who could not afford to express more open support. More leisurely retrospective feedback on the lobbying campaign indicates that the inevitable irritation caused in some sectors was probably not unhelpful, and that it was certainly outweighed by the more positive responses. What is quite clear is that the relationships developed over the years with key figures in local government have been extremely helpful.

In early 2004 the Housing Corporation confirmed an allocation of slightly over £1M to the project.

top

The Cost of Rural Isolation

This issue has bedevilled the project from the time of the earliest estimates of cost. The initial reaction of almost all the 'professionals' approached, whether from County or Borough Council Departments, the Housing Corporation, Abbeyfield UK or from potential funding bodies, to the unit costs of the flats was one of either disbelief or horror. The project team had to work very hard and patiently to explain the background and reasons which justified these levels of cost, and this usually could only be achieved if the explanation of the figures could be supplemented by personal exposure to the remote rural landscape in which the project is set. There are at least three reasons for the high unit costs of the flats (approximately £160K) which are directly attributable to the particular rural situation:

1. the remote situation adds to costs of both construction labour and materials,
2. the environmental factors introduced by situation in the National Park,
3. the sparse population in the catchment area results in the number of flats which can be justified being well below the economic optimum for capital.

These three factors result in a 20% increase in cost.

Although most people will accept the logic of this explanation, there remains a reluctance to fund the extra cost. This reluctance tends to over-ride any Government policy preferences in favour of redressing rural deprivation.

Fundraising

In the early stages of the project the fundraising efforts of the project team were low key, and aimed as much at raising awareness of the project in the valley. Funds were raised through social events and activities to cover the administrative costs involved, while North Yorkshire Social Services, Yorkshire Forward and Help the Aged provided funds for the research. When the Abbeyfield Esk Moors Society was formed support was offered from the Abbeyfield fundraising team and a local sub-group began to map out the fundraising opportunities and available contacts.

Alongside these efforts members of the team had, from the early days of EMAE, developed strong relationships with key individuals in Social Services and Housing Departments and in the local Primary Care Trust. These contacts came to recognise the potential of the project to help them deliver services which they found difficult to provide in the rural areas, and they themselves came to champion the project. This proved vital when, on securing the Housing Corporation allocation, the project became viable and serious fundraising started.

At this juncture, Abbeyfield UK decided that more time would need to be invested in fundraising if the project was to succeed. A fundraiser based in the North of England, who had worked successfully on previous Abbeyfield projects, was appointed to guide the process with the small team from the local committee and to co-ordinate with Abbeyfield in St Albans. The project quickly began to locate potential sources of funding from the public sector through the local authority channels. This process was further boosted by the recent lobbying campaign in support of the Social Housing Grant bid, which had sensitised local politicians and council officers to the aims and needs of the project. At the time of writing, all except £300K of the funding secured so far has come from the public sector.

The interest shown in the project from local authorities has generated an unexpected spin-off. The project has appealed to people in local government largely because it is so firmly rooted in the community, and it is seen as a model which could be used elsewhere.

The project has been particularly both inspired and supported by Neil Revely of the North Yorkshire Social Services Directorate. As a result, the fundraising team has been asked to talk about the project at events designed to share good practice. A number of articles have also been written about the project. This has provided the project with a high profile, both locally and nationally, from which the campaign for funding from trusts and the private sector is now in full swing.

top

---

LEARNING AND LESSONS:
A Personal View from the 'Grass Roots'

This project has been generated entirely from within the community - from the 'grass roots'. In country areas such as ours there seems to be no blueprint for provision of care in their own locality for older people who need it. Low population figures in difficult geographical areas mean that there is no care provision from within that neighbourhood - travel is necessary to access it.

Consequently the project has aroused considerable interest as an exemplar of a new way of meeting the needs of local communities, and it seems appropriate to end by attempting to draw together the main lessons we have learned, and to suggest how some of the difficulties we have encountered could be eased in future.

• The fact that the project is community-based is crucial. We have nurtured our links with the community on the social level, and this has been reinforced by the research we have commissioned. The research base has, in turn, given the project a very firm grounding and credibility with the outside world.
  
• We have acknowledged our limitations as a local volunteer group. At times the group loyalty may have tempted us to believe we could do everything ourselves, but we have always been reminded in time that we should avoid entering into commitments, such as directly employing staff, which we could either not be confident of sustaining in the long-term, or which would be better undertaken by professionals.
  
• It is clear, in retrospect, that we have been very effective in friend-raising. In talking to both elected representatives and officers from local authorities about the project, we have infected some key decision-makers with our enthusiasm and commitment, as well with the virtues of the project. In turn they have then helped us to understand the workings of government and to recognise opportunities that we may well have missed. It is this learning which we are now bringing to the task of fundraising in the private sector - raise friends first.
  
• In the earlier stages of the project we probably relied too heavily on the mechanisms of local and national government - we trusted that filling in the forms well and ticking all the boxes would bring us the due rewards for an excellent project. This failed on a few occasions, most notably with the Social Housing bid. A number of friends among the professionals within the voluntary sector helped us to realise the need for more active advocacy of the project, and we can now see that this is particularly necessary for grass roots working.
  Where projects are driven from within government departments or agencies, their managers are much more aware of the organisational culture in which decisions are taken, and can make the appropriate adjustments to content and emphasis. If grass roots processes are to be encouraged, there is a need to help community groups to recognise, understand and react to the internal mechanisms and culture of government. Perhaps the current move towards the appointment of Rural Housing Enablers is a recognition of this need in the housing sector, which could usefully be built upon to cover Social Services and Health.
  
• An apparent mismatch between stated government policy and application of the rules has been a source of some irritation. For example, clear policy support for the housing needs of older people in rural isolation was not matched by acceptance of the inevitable extra costs of meeting those needs. This is understandable in terms of pressures and politics within government, but nonetheless very frustrating for those on the outside. Such issues can probably only be addressed by matching performance criteria to non-financial objectives in addition to value for money.
  

top

---

OUR VISION OF THE FUTURE FOR AN AGEING POPULATION

There are two underlying principles to our vision for the year 2025:

• that older people experience total support and encouragement to remain fully active within the community, to remain living in their own homes for as long as they wish, and to know that supported accommodation will be available locally if needed.
  
• that older people have acquired the confidence that the necessary utilities, services and care are both reliably available and affordable. This principle presents particular difficulties in an isolated rural community such as ours.
  

The establishment of these principles over the next twenty years represents a very considerable challenge - particularly when bearing in mind that it has taken us over seven years to progress to our current position. There are a number of key themes which need to be developed, including:

• Housing - we need to develop alternative models to encourage flexibility both in mixed tenure arrangements for supported housing, and in recycling of property within the community. We are examining, for example, the feasibility of retaining houses released by older people moving into supported accommodation as affordable housing, rather than being sold as second or holiday homes.
  
• Technology - while we understand the current thinking directed towards technological monitoring of individuals within their homes, we have concerns that this may lead to rather de-personalised services. We prefer to see technology in an assistive, rather than supervisory role, with more help available from friends within the community. With an ageing population, we see greater availability of fit and active 60s and 70s able to support the 80s and 90s.
  
• Finances - in the present climate very many older people have great fear about their future care, and their ability both to pay the bills and retain their dignity. They do not understand the rules and regulations, and in many cases prefer not to enquire. This situation can only sap the confidence which we seek to encourage, and there is a need both for government to develop greater long term vision and clarity about financing of care, and for the community, particularly the younger retired, to become more active in helping older people to understand their situation.
  
• Volunteering - with the increasing span of the 'third age' there is scope for more fit and active younger retired people to become more involved in community issues, and to apply their very considerable skills and experience to these tasks. This will have the effect not only of helping to establish the principles we support, but also will prepare those involved to cope better with their own old age. The further development of voluntary work would have huge potential benefits both nationally and within communities, and we believe it would be worth exploring options to encourage such growth, for example by recognising such work through extra credits in the pension scheme to help volunteers who may themselves be feeling the effects of the demographic squeeze on pensions. We recognise the danger of diluting the voluntary principle, but believe that, provided that some distance is maintained between effort and reward, then there could be enormous overall benefit.
  

top

---

AN UPDATE - JANUARY 2005

As I write this in January 2005, here on the moors as in other parts of Britain both urban and rural, there is no electricity.

So far for 37 hours.

It happens most years. Many older people have been left cold and alone in the dark. Friends have been taking around aid to different isolated cottages. Sources of warmth and food.

Oh, and since I wrote before, Annie has had another fall…
We are going to make warmth to gather them in to -
a centre from which they can be cared for.

(January 2005)

Case Studies

• Finchale College
• Abbeyfield Ilkley
• Girlguiding UK