Charitable Supported Housing: Why Licensing Must Evolve

Table of Contents

Regulation Without Recognition: Why Charitable Supported Housing Must Not Be Legislated Out of Existence

The government is currently consulting on a new licensing regime for supported housing, introduced through the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023. The aims are clear: raise standards, improve accountability, and stop poor-quality provision slipping through the cracks. These goals are necessary, and in some areas long overdue.

But there is a risk. In trying to fix what is broken, government may also dismantle what already works.

In its current form, the proposed regime threatens to sideline — or even legislate out — a model of charitable supported housing that is proven, ethical, sustainable, and cost-effective.

That model is ours.

A model rooted in charity, quality, and outcomes

Zetetick Housing has provided supported housing for adults with learning disabilities, autism, and additional needs for nearly twenty years. We are a charity. We do not deliver care. We are not a housing association, and we are not a speculative landlord. We are a values-led housing provider, committed to delivering safe, stable, person-centred housing.

We manage nearly 200 units of specialist supported housing. About 5 percent are owned by us, including homes we hold on behalf of the NHS. The rest are leased. But unlike long-term, high-risk lease models that have caused concern, ours are short-term, renewable, and low-risk. These leases are flexible, reduce financial exposure, and adapt to changing local need.

We also maintain the homes we manage and work with our landlords in a professional and respectful way. Over 90 percent of our landlords choose to renew with us. That is not luck. It is the result of how we operate — through partnership, integrity, and professionalism.

We deliver quality and value without gaming the system

Zetetick Housing is not speculative. It is not profit-driven. It is transparent, consistent, and accountable. Our model is shaped by evidence, built on strong relationships, and governed with purpose.

We work closely with care providers to ensure that every resident receives housing and support appropriate to their needs. Our rents are benchmarked to the Local Housing Allowance. We apply intensive housing management only where needed and only when justified.

Our outcomes are strong. Our homes are safe. Our relationships are trusted. Our model is lean, ethical, efficient, and scalable. In every meaningful sense, it delivers value for money.

Why the current proposals are incompatible with that model

Despite this, several aspects of the proposed licensing regime could exclude providers like Zetetick altogether.

First, linking licensing to registration with the Regulator of Social Housing (RSH) does not work for charities. The RSH rent standard does not reflect the cost of private sector leasing or the realities of intensive housing management. Without reform, we are excluded by design.

Second, subsidy inequality remains built into the system. Registered Providers receive full Housing Benefit subsidy. Charitable organisations like us — even if licensed, compliant, and high-performing — do not. This makes many of our schemes financially unviable and places tenants at risk through no fault of their own.

Third, giving local authorities unlimited discretion to add licensing conditions could create a postcode lottery. Regulation must be national, proportionate, and consistent. Local interpretation should be carefully defined and limited.

Finally, using planning powers to control licensed supported housing risks adding cost and confusion without benefit. Planning is not a substitute for regulation. Licensing should be the primary mechanism.

The cost of being misunderstood

Under the proposals, our model could be forced out — not because it fails in quality or performance, but because it does not fit a regulatory framework built for different types of organisations.

This is a structural oversight. If it is not addressed, the consequences will be serious — for tenants, for care providers, and for councils who rely on trusted charitable housing partners.

If charities like Zetetick are not heard, and if this consultation fails to deliver smart, inclusive regulation, proven housing models will be lost.

There is no one-size-fits-all solution. The supported housing sector is diverse. So are the people it serves. There are many models that work. A successful licensing regime must be built around that diversity or it will fail the people it is meant to protect.

What must change

We are not asking for exceptions. We are asking for a system that recognises difference while maintaining high standards. We propose the following changes:

Licensing that does not depend on RSH registration, with alternative compliance routes for charitable providers
Equal access to subsidy for all licensed and compliant schemes
A clearly defined national licensing framework, with minimal local discretion
Recognition that short-term, renewable leases can support stability and quality when designed properly

Regulation without recognition is regulation that fails

The government is right to act. But if it fails to recognise the full range of providers operating in this space, it risks creating a system that works on paper but fails in practice.

Zetetick Housing has shown that high-quality, ethical supported housing can exist outside traditional regulatory models. That contribution should be included — not ignored.

Because we are not asking for permission to exist.

We are asking for a system that can see what already works — and protect it.

As a Registered Charity, Zetetick provide Safe Homes and Empowered people