225
This review was presented by Gareth Mitchell, Chief Executive of Colchester Borough Homes (CBH), Anne Grahamslaw, Chair of the Board of CBH, and Councillor Fox, Portfolio Holder for Housing.
Councillor Fox described the expansion of services provided by CBH over recent years, the arrangements for ensuring adherence to its Management Agreement through the Medium-Term Delivery Plan, and current project work. This included the procurement of a new Housing Management IT System, and the project for improved, modern sheltered accommodation on the Elfreda House site. Planning work continued regarding expected new social housing units, in conjunction with the work of Colchester Amphora Homes Ltd.
The Chair of the CBH Board highlighted the continual oversight work carried out by their Board, which monitored the organisation’s performance.
The Chief Executive of CBH explained the move to eight new key performance indicators (KPIs), concentrating on meaningful ways to measure the main elements of performance, and supported by background information. This was part of an improved reporting process involving CBH, the Portfolio Holder and the Council’s Client Team.
Achievements during the year included success in adapting the Company to meet the requirements of the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017. Early prevention measures had led to positive results. The level of repairs completed on time remained above target, whilst rent collection levels and gas safety arrangements continued to be strengths.
The change in customer satisfaction performance was explained, with efforts being made to make this more representative of actual performance and overall customer satisfaction. The previous indicator had been too narrow but had been broadened to cover all services delivered, with a challenging target. This had not been met in 2018/19, but work was ongoing to improve performance. Satisfaction levels for repairs carried out by CBH staff were consistently higher than for repairs carried out by contractor staff. There was now a focus on improving the satisfaction rates relating to contractor staff performance.
A second KPI target which had not been achieved was the percentage of capital programme elements completed on time, where the cumulative result for 2018/19 was 66.3%, compared to a target of 95%. A commitment had been made to the Portfolio Holder for Housing that CBH would catch up and complete the outstanding works from 2018/19. This had already been achieved by the end of June.
Time taken to re-let empty properties had also not met its target (25 days). Process improvements have been identified and additional work will be done to improve contractor performance. Karen Loweman, CBH Director of Operations, had been commissioned to review the process for preparing empty propertied for re-let and identify further ways to improve performance.
A common theme across the areas in which targets have been missed was the procurement and performance of contractors. A vast majority of the contracts were in the Council’s name, procured by CBH and Council together. Difficulties had been found across many sectors, where contractors placed low bids for work, won contracts and then failed to meet contract terms, often because they could not afford to successfully appoint subcontractors, having bid so low during the procurement process. In one case, this had led to a contractor pulling out of a Council contract less than a year after it commenced.
CBH managed contracts on the Council’s behalf, and resource went into managing and monitoring these. CBH worked with residents and the Council to monitor contract delivery. The cost of contracts was fixed, and quality of work would not be compromised, so the element which slipped was the time taken to complete work, with delays being experienced. CBH has changed the way it addressed procurement, with larger contracts being replaced by a greater number of smaller contracts. This allowed a greater number of local and smaller contractors to bid for contracts, whilst still attracting bids from efficient national firms. Whilst this approach was being taken to address issues with contractor performance, it was also noted that the Company had struggled to recruit to positions, where the salary grades did not compare favourably to those in the private sector.
A significant challenge was expected relating to maintaining high levels of rent collection following the roll-out of Universal Credit, whilst minimising the number of evictions caused by rent arrears. CBH worked to minimise the number of tenants building up rent arrears.
Although the results of independent benchmarking against comparable organisations had not yet been released, it was expected that these would continue to show that CBH delivered a low-cost service, which assisted the Council in reducing the pressure of overhead costs on its Housing Revenue Account. Efficiencies and savings were being achieved in procurement, controlling the cost of repair services, and in the operation of photo-voltaic panels on properties. Bed and breakfast usage and spending had been minimised, whilst targets relating to the energy efficiency of stock had been exceeded, saving money for both the Council and for tenants.
Fire safety compliance and assurance remained a priority, although the risk level in Colchester was lower than in some other authorities, as the Council did not own high-rise or cladded buildings. CBH had met its commitments regarding sheltered and general-needs blocks, and 30-minute fire doors (FD30) were now being installed, following delays caused by market shortages. CBH continued to be ISO 18001 compliant and its health and safety was regularly audited.
Funding to deal with rough sleeping had been won, and outreach work, insight and capacity had never been higher in Colchester. 35 rough sleepers have been re-housed and 12 re-connected with their families. Of those re-housed, four of them had amassed 38 years between them of rough sleeping. There had been one eviction from the Housing First Pilot, but success achieved with three people successfully moving on. Confidence in Colchester continued to be shown by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.
It was expected that a new, tougher regulatory regime, expected to come from the most recent green paper on social housing would not affect the Council’s general needs stock, as it includes no high-rise properties, but it may affect sheltered accommodation blocks and there will be a more rigorous regulatory environment.
Responding to questions regarding CBH’s approach to mitigating difficulties with recruitment and contractor performance, the Chief Executive informed the Panel that the Company continued to experience difficulties in recruiting certain skillsets, due to difficulty in competing with private sector pay levels. Creative recruitment targeting is being attempted, but it was likely that difficulty would remain whilst the labour market remained strong. On the subject of tenders for contract work, procurement rules could limit the response to difficulties, however work continues to ensure adherence to these rules whilst allowing a more diverse range of applicants to tender for work, with a mix of large and small contracts. Efforts had been concentrated on avoiding unrealistically-low bids for work.
The benefits of diverse local procurement/contracting were stated, including the boost to the local economy, however there were some contracts which were of a size or type which made it difficult for smaller, local, firms to bid. CBH had a well-motivated staff who conducted some work in-house, and there was potential for more work to be carried out by CBH staff directly, but this would require a political decision to be made by the Council.
The Panel requested more detail on the slight increase in evictions during 2018/19. The Chief Executive explained that there had been a national rise in the number of evictions, but that this remained a last resort for CBH and the Council. The distinction was drawn between evictions resulting from antisocial behaviour, and evictions as a result of rent arrears. The Financial Inclusion Team continued to provide early intervention support to address tenants’ financial problems. It was noted that it was likely that the Council would have a duty to house tenants evicted for arrears, so eviction was not preferable.
Panel members raised concerns regarding the likely effect of Universal Credit roll-out on future evictions, as this roll-out had commenced later in Colchester than in many local authority areas. They were informed that, in a survey conducted on 39 local authorities, Colchester was close to the median regarding percentage of tenants receiving Universal Credit (10% of tenants in Council tenancies, compared to 12% median). Other local authorities had seen an increase in the number of ‘Notices of Seeking Possession’ (NOSPs). CBH employed early intervention to prevent this, and communicated with at-risk tenants, with partnership working between officers, Jobcentre Plus and tenants. An increase in evictions and drop in rent collection was feared for the housing sector in 2019/20, and a request had been made to the Department for Work and Pensions for better landlord engagement in the roll-out, including data sharing so ways to address pressures can be found. The Chair of the CBH Board gave assurance that the Board continued to monitor the risk relating to Universal Credit and the mitigations put in place to minimise any effect from this. It was noted that there had been no evictions in the first quarter of 2019/20.
The Panel asked how local authorities were planning to measure the success of their actions regarding compliance with the Homelessness Reduction Act, and as to how well CBH and the Council would score in comparison to others. A measure had been agreed between CBH and the Council, in the absence of a national measure. This had now been accepted by government as its chosen measure for compliance. The measure showed the proportion of applicants for whom a duty to house is accepted, for applicants who have been assessed and received a personal housing plan. The new legislation laid out two 56-day periods (for prevention and relief respectively) which caused an imbalance in the quarterly figures for 2018/19. Addressing pressure on housing stock included buyback of former council properties, a private sector leasing scheme and enforcement of planning requirements for affordable homes, but the challenge continued to grow.
The Panel asked for detail regarding an increase in the number of days to re-let void (empty) properties and on CBH’s action to address this. The Panel were informed that the target on this was mid-range but challenging. CBH (and its contractors) had been noted as performing well on cost but falling short on time taken. The contractor had failed to meet its commitments and had triggered the 26-week break clause to pull out of the contract. A replacement contractor had been appointed, but it took time to recover the situation. Pressure also came from voids which required additional remediation work, due to work having been refused by the former tenants (e.g. kitchen or bathroom replacement), or work required to fix tenant damage. Process changes were being considered, such as waiting until a new tenant had moved in before offering a new bathroom or kitchen. This would cut void time and give new tenants a chance to pick options as to the kitchen or bathroom style.
A Panel member requested information as to what plans there were to build new disabled-accessible properties to increase the Council’s stock of available properties which comply with Part M of the Building Regulations (2010). The Portfolio Holder for Housing described the new house building programme being launched by the Council, including the re-starting of the garage site programme, with five of the new properties (on former garage sites) being compliant with Part M of current Building Regulations. The Portfolio Holder stated that there was public appetite for the provision of new council housing and the Council continued to explore new ways to provide this, including within the North Essex Garden Communities Project. The Council have invited input from George Clarke’s team, in light of the Channel 4 TV presenter currently presenting a series on ways to provide social housing.
A Panel member stressed the need to address the visual impact of estates and to carry out remedial work to address maintenance issues, causing residents to take more pride in their areas. The Chief Executive agreed that estate improvements increased resident satisfaction and lowered antisocial behaviour rates. He explained why such work in the Asset Management Programme had been drastically scaled back to ease the pressure on the Housing Revenue Account caused by the cumulative 1% reduction each year for four years in the rent charged to tenants of the Council, as dictated by central government. There was now a business case for restarting such work. Garage renovations had already caused an increase in income and an increase in resident satisfaction.
The Panel asked whether it would potentially be easier and more satisfactory to tenants for small maintenance works to be carried out in-house, and if action could be taken to prevent aggressive marketing/sales calls (for services and seeking potential disrepair claims for compensation), especially to vulnerable residents. It was confirmed that Community Caretakers carried out small-scale repairs, but that outsourcing works was often quicker and cheaper. Regarding sales calls, it was confirmed that the easiest way to prevent disrepair claims being pushed by third-party claims companies was to meet deadlines for repair completions. CBH worked to raise awareness amongst residents regarding how to avoid and deal with aggressive marketing calls.
Questions were asked as to how targets were set for Medium Term Delivery Plan KPIs, and whether draft targets could be given pre-scrutiny by the Panel. These were agreed annually between CBH and the Council’s Client Team, scrutinised by the CBH Board and signed-off by the Portfolio Holder for Housing. The current measures and targets had been set to focus on necessary information and allowing necessary oversight on the most important aspects of performance. Quarterly client meetings were held, along with ongoing discussions. Targets were set so as to be challenging but achievable. The Portfolio Holder welcomed pre-scrutiny to be carried out and the Panel agreed that they wished to conduct this pre-scrutiny for the next annual target-setting process.
The Portfolio Holder was asked whether consideration had been given to building of new estates of Council-owned stock, rather than the current method of ‘pepper-potting’ social housing within mixed-tenure developments. The Portfolio Holder stated that discussions would continue as to what the North Essex Garden Communities (NEGC) Project could make possible on this, whilst giving a sense of place to developments. There was an aim for 30% of housing within the NEGC Project to be affordable housing, and the Portfolio Holder speculated that this could potentially all be Council-owned housing. A substantial number of council houses were expected for the Mill Road development and Cabinet were keen to examine what proportion of land allocated to the NEGC Project could be used for council housing. A political consensus would be sought for this and details would be provided to Members once they become clearer. The Panel noted that Richard Bayley, NEGC Ltd Group Managing Director, had been questioned by the Panel regarding provision of affordable homes, and that the Panel was keen to ensure that commitments regarding Council-owned and affordable housing were kept. An update on this was requested as part of the future process for briefing Members on the NEGC Project’s progress.
The Chair summarised the highlights of the item and expressed the Panel’s thanks to Andrew Grimwade, CBH Rough Sleeper Co-ordinator, and his team for their work. Thanks were also expressed to the Chair of the CBH Board, Anne Grahamslaw, as she was soon to reach the end of her term on the Board. In turn, Anne Grahamslaw praised the ongoing work of CBH and Council officers to support tenants, highlighted the strength of governance arrangements at Board level, and noted the improvements in KPI reporting, which had led to improvements in the presentation of performance to the Scrutiny Panel.
RESOLVED that the Panel will conduct pre-scrutiny of the next round of draft proposed targets for the Medium-Term Delivery Plan KPIs, as proposed by CBH and the Council’s Client Services Team.