Jackie Thomas, Director of Housing Management
David Sherrington, Team Leader, Communications & Chief Executive's Office
Minutes:
HfH provided a verbal presentation to the panel on issues pertaining to partnership working within the registered housing provider sector. The following provides a summary of the key points made and subsequent panel discussions.
Homes for Haringey (HfH) is an Arms Length Management Organisation (ALMO), managing housing stock on behalf of Haringey Council. HfH was created as the main delivery vehicle for the decent homes programme in the borough. The management agreement has been extended until 2016.
HfH is primarily a housing management organisation, which is reflected in their funded activities and overall budget (i.e. just 5% is for environmental improvements). In terms of capital investment in HfH stock, this is delivered through Decent Homes, though it was evident that there would be significant reduction in funds administered through this programme in the future.
It was noted by the panel that with the development of the Tenant Services Authority a much stronger lead had been taken with regulation of housing associations. New standards had been developed which came in to effect on April 1st 2010 and these were applicable to the whole of the social housing sector, not just housing associations. HfH were thus included within these new service standards.
The panel noted that there were a number of ways in which HfH works with other housing associations and on collaborative housing projects within the borough. It was noted that:
· HfH are members of the Integrated Housing Board with other housing associations to discuss strategic housing issues in the borough
· HfH have undertaken a pilot project working with other housing associations to look at issues on a multi-landlord estate (Campsbourne)
· HfH participates in other local forums such as Asset Management, Customer Access and ASB
· It was noted that together with a number of other housing associations, HfH were active contributors in the affordable warmth group
The panel noted that HfH have a good knowledge of local housing stock and issues affecting local tenants. The panel noted that HfH had undertaken some intensive consultation exercises to support this, as illustrated through the local door knocking exercise to collect data from local tenants. It was felt that this knowledge has the potential to increase the place shaping role of the organisation (in collaboration with other organisations).
It was reported that HfH do provide housing management services for a number of smaller Housing Associations in the borough, for example, out of hours repair service. The panel noted that whilst this area provided considerable developmental and expansion opportunities for HfH, it was also an area of high risk, as the organisation did not have as developed knowledge about this housing stock as their own. This was not a straightforward issue as there were many complicating factors, including VAT implications.
The panel were keen to understand what the main issues facing HfH in working with local housing associations. A number of points were made to the panel which included:
· There are so many housing associations/ registered social landlords in the borough which makes engagement difficult
· And following on from this, it is difficult to engage with housing associations without knowing which associations have stock where. In this context the panel noted it would be beneficial if social housing stock was GIS located and mapped. GIS mapping would also help link to Experian social mapping tools.
· There is lots of community investment undertaken in the borough through housing associations and it would be useful to have further knowledge of what is provided by whom
· Partnership arrangements may not always be straightforward as there may be complex lease and transfer arrangements in place around social housing stock (e.g. a housing association has 8 properties in Broadwater Farm which are leased from the Council).
Agreed: that GIS mapping of social housing in the borough is developed to facilitate partnership in this sector at both operational and strategic levels.
In terms of stock transfer, the panel noted that the council itself had approximately 400 properties external to the borough in Waltham Cross, Enfield and Hackney. These properties are managed by HfH. In Waltham Cross, two estates had voted to transfer over to a RSL and one to remain with the council. An option appraisal paper has recently been presented to Cabinet about the future of these properties. Any future disposal may reduce expenditure and increase capital receipts.
The panel noted that housing associations receive dedicated funding for community improvement projects such as training, employment, ASB and other community projects. Of importance to the review was the degree to which these are provided singularly or in partnership and whether there was the potential for joint service provision or if synergies and efficiencies could be obtained through collaborative provision.
It was felt that new technologies and software would play an increasing role in facilitating partnerships in this sector. The panel heard that Hfh had profiled housing stock and were beginning to map service hotspots for ASB, youth disengagement and other locally held data. With this data and greater knowledge of where housing association stock was located, more coordinated work with housing associations could take place.
The panel were keen to understand what might lay beyond the 2016 for HfH, when the current management agreement expires. The panel heard that HfH had a good local track record; successful in securing decent homes funding and delivering improvement, had a strong track record in tenant engagement and were active partners in a wide range of local service planning and delivery. Whilst the housing policy landscape and finance structures were changing rapidly, it was felt that this track record put them in a strong role for continuing this work.
HfH responded to a number of issues raised directly by the panel concerning partnerships with housing associations:
· ASB: the council’s ASBAT team coordinates this work for high profile issues of ASB irrespective of tenure. HfH deals with lower level issues with its tenants.
· Sub letting: HfH works closely with council in this field and the work in the authority is supported by two fraud officers. There is not a lot of partnership work in this field with other local housing associations (assuming larger associations have their own officers)
· Community projects: as was demonstrated through pilot work, housing associations fund a broad range of community activities but these are not necessarily joined up with the work of the council or other housing association undertaking similar work in the area
· Estate walkabouts: there was the potential to have joint estate walkabout where there were multiple landlords, and this was noted to occur with one larger landlord (L & Q) on one estate. Landlords are not systematically invited.
The panel noted that there may be synergies and efficiencies from more coordinated or integrated provision of community services provided by housing associations. Although partnership work was key to the delivery of more coordinated provision, the panel were keen to understand the challenges in this approach. From their experience of such initiatives, HfH noted that following were important:
· Getting interested parties around a table discussing issues of common concern
· Building relationships and building trust on projects
· Dialogue to help map out common services
· Tenant consultation – common processes
HfH reported to the panel that a lot of work had been done to improve resident involvement and engagement structures. The panel noted that in recent HfH board elections there was a high turn out of 48%. It was noted that additional work was about to commence with a pilot project to improve resident involvement for all tenures.
In respect of developing common social housing standards in the borough, the panel heard that many RSLs and housing associations may be wary of such an approach given the structure of these organisations (i.e. with stock dispersed over a wide range of boroughs). Developing common standards, would inevitably present logistical and workload problems if housing associations were to be developed with all local authorities in which stock was held. For smaller housing associations, this would be very difficult.
Nonetheless, there was a perception that some RSLs may have become very detached from tenants, especially where stock is dispersed across a wide geographical area. Thus the development of local offers by the TSA was established to help promote further engagement with tenants to reach agreement on standards which tenants felt to be important. All RSL and housing association are in the process of publishing their local offers so tenants can be clear about what to expect from their landlord. HfH was noted to be a 3 star service in terms of resident involvement.
The panel noted the new council structure which would see the implementation of Area Committees. It was felt that there should be further consideration as to how community work and projects developed through the housing sector are aligned and integrated in to these new decision making and accountability structures.