Housing associations piloting a new inspection regime will be given only five days' notice by Audit Commission officials. Inspections will take three days - compared to 10 days under the current system - with inspectors focusing on those areas where performance is known to be poor.
The Audit Commission is seeking twelve housing associations with fair or good ratings to volunteer for the pilot scheme. Those found to be performing poorly during the pilot inspections will be subject to a more substantial inspection - probably within 12 to 18 months.
The Audit Commission view short-term inspections as a more efficient use of resources than the current system. Whilst volunteering for short-term inspections could diminish the surprise element, participating organisations will not be given advance indication of when the inspections are to take place.
A consultation paper released by the Audit Commission seeks views on whether snap inspections should be subject to the same assessment system as the current star-rated regime. An alternative would be adopting a 'distance travelled' system used to evaluate councils, with judgements ranging from 'not improving adequately' to 'improving strongly.'
A new regulatory regime designed to give greater power to social housing tenants could see them compensated by landlords for poor performance.
Professor Martin Cave, who is carrying out the first independent review for 30 years of the sector's regulation, confirmed he will recommend that landlords face graded sanctions for poor performance, including the compulsory re-tendering of the management of homes where tenants are unhappy with services.
Professor Cave's report, Putting tenants first, will reject calls to introduce a system of self-regulation, and instead recommend a 'co-regulatory' regime. This would see landlords sending annual returns to a regulator and monitoring themselves. Under the new system, a group of tenants would be able to trigger an investigation by the regulator.
An Audit Commission inspection found that A1 Housing's services have improved from a poor rating to a fair rating, with excellent prospects for improvement. Inspectors awarded the service one-star.
The report shows that most of the services A1 Housing delivers to its 7,100 tenants have improved since its last inspection, in 2005, when it was given a poor zero-star rating. Further work, however, is required before it can achieve the two-stars necessary to release government funding for large-scale home improvements.
The inspectors found the following:
Improvements in A1's understanding of the needs of its customers, better involvement of customers in decision making, and generally increased accessibility of services.
Improvements in how quickly and efficiently repairs and maintenance are carried out, and robust approaches in dealing with anti-social behaviour and environmental issues on estates.
Weaknesses in managing empty homes, delivering disabled adaptations, and helping customers in debt.
Weaknesses in longer term planning, managing performance in some service areas, and ensuring value for money
The recommendations made include:
Improving a number of working practices - particularly around managing empty homes and leasehold properties.
Developing better systems for managing performance and ensuring value for money in some areas.
Continuing to work with Bassetlaw District Council to develop longer term plans for improving the quality of the homes it manages and the services it provides for customers.
Set up by Bassetlaw Council to manage its housing estates, A1 Housing manages 7,100 properties.
The Supporting People programme provided by Southend-on-Sea Borough Council was awarded a poor zero-star for the second time, and has uncertain prospects for improvement, according to a report released by the Audit Commission.
The programme was also found to provide a zero-star service in June 2005.
Inspectors found:
Grants and services are not prioritised, directed or delivered in the most appropriate and effective way.
The Council has not fully assessed the needs of service users. This has prevented the proper development of the programme to meet the changing needs of vulnerable people in Southend.
Information on Supporting People is not consistently user-friendly, and knowledge of Supporting People is limited at Council offices where there is face-to-face contact with service users.
There are weaknesses in the areas of performance, risk and financial management of the programme. The programme's value for money has not been fully assessed.
The capacity of the Supporting People team is not yet sufficiently developed and key posts are yet to be filled.
The completion of service reviews has led to improved service provision and quality, and there is a good relationship between the Supporting People team and providers.
To help the service improve, inspectors made a number of recommendations, including:
Strengthening performance management, and improving financial and risk management of the programme.
Strengthening the opportunity to access Supporting People information and service provision. This should include regularly monitoring access arrangements and improving the Supporting People pages on the Council's website.
Establishing a regular approach to updating data on needs, increasing the approach to involvement in partner groups, and regularly assessing the impact of fairer charging promotions.
Southend-on-Sea Borough Council acts as the administering local authority for the development and delivery of the Supporting People programme in its area. There are 28 different providers of housing related support involved in the Supporting People programme in Southend, and services are provided to 2,425 service users.
An Audit Commission report concluded that the strategic housing service provided by Wirral Council is good with promising prospects for improvement. It awarded the service a two-star rating.
Strengths identified in the report include:
Easy access to services, customer focused staff, and an effective approach to equality and diversity emerging.
A comprehensive and robust approach to the development of housing strategies through strong partnership working.
A well-developed private sector housing service and strong performance on improving energy efficiency and reducing fuel poverty.
Strong performance on reducing the levels of properties not meeting the Government's decent homes standard across both private and social sectors.
Areas noted as requiring further attention include:
The lack of a clear and explicit vision for housing for the whole borough over the longer-term.
The lack of an affordable housing policy to guide development across the borough and limited use being made of planning gain to increase the proportion of affordable housing.
The inability to consistently demonstrate value for money across housing services.
The housing service provided by Mid Devon District Council, which manages 3,150 dwellings, was rated by an Audit Commission inspection team as poor with poor prospects for improvement. The service was awarded a zero-star rating.
Inspectors praised the performance of the rent collection and estate management services but found tenant participation, performance on repairs and the overall value for money of the service to be unsatisfactory.
Strengths include:
Most homes have been modernised and are in good structural condition, with regular gas safety checks taking place.
While antisocial behaviour is quite rare in Mid Devon, when it occurs it is dealt with effectively.
Areas for improvement include:
Tenants are not consulted properly on both major and routine decisions, or sufficiently involved in monitoring the performance of the service.
Tenants are not provided with basic information to tell them what they can expect of different services.
The speed and quality of repairs, improvements and adaptations work is poor.
The Council has not monitored the value for money of each service and it is clear that tenants are paying more than they should for the repairs and maintenance service in particular.
There are low levels of collection of other income, such as rechargeable repairs.
The sheltered housing service is outdated and the adaptations service poorly managed.
Barnet Council (Supporting People):
Two-star good service with promising prospects for improvement.
Cannock Chase Council (Strategic Housing):
One-star fair service with uncertain prospects for improvement.
Corby Borough Council (Landlord Services):
One-star fair service with uncertain prospects for improvement.
Forest Heath District Council (Strategic Housing):
One-star fair service with promising prospects for improvement.
Islington Council (Supporting People):
Two-star good service with promising prospects for improvement.
Leeds City Council (Supporting People):
One-star fair service with promising prospects for improvement.
Milton Keynes Council (Supporting People):
One-star fair service with promising prospects for improvement.
Reading Borough Council (Housing Management):
Two-star good service with promising prospects for improvement.
Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council (Supporting People):
Two-star good service with promising prospects for improvement.
Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (Supporting People):
One-star fair service with promising prospects for improvement.
South Tyneside Homes (South Tyneside Council ALMO):
One-star fair service with promising prospects for improvement.
Friendship Care & Housing:
One-star fair service with promising prospects for improvement.
Rosebery Housing Association:
Two-star good service with promising prospects for improvement.
Salvation Army Housing Association:
One-star fair service with promising prospects for improvement.
Teign Housing:
One-star fair service with promising prospects for improvement.
Here at Tower Homes, we are exceptionally proud of our achievement in becoming the first London, and second housing association ever, to be awarded the maximum three stars and excellent prospects rating by the Audit Commission. This achievement was brought into even sharper focus recently at the Chartered Institute of Housing conference in Harrogate, where we were presented with an award by Ruth Kelly. Of the 130 inspections carried out last year, Tower Homes was the only housing association to achieve top marks.
So how did we join the exclusive triple star club? For us, the most important aspect was meticulous pre-planning - not only to test our services but also to ensure that all our people were involved, understood the importance of the inspection and what it meant for Tower, and were clear about their roles.
We used the long lead in period to inspection to ensure we understood the relevant KLOE's and started to break down the type of supporting evidence that we would be required to produce for each area. This was facilitated by a project team approach, work groupings composed of people from various teams, working together on specific areas and looking at our processes.
We've already mentioned our approach of involving all our people in the inspection. This also began at this early stage with a clear process of communication, established to fully explain and demystify the process involved behind inspection and get buy-in from everyone. We continued this throughout inspection with regular, bite-sized communications that people could absorb and quick, focused training sessions. We also tried to introduce an element of fun with an Audit quiz and informal training sessions. This all helped to create an atmosphere where people understood they were all critical to our success.
Of course, a lot of our communications and preparation time were aimed at re-assuring our people about the inspection visit and dealing with the anxiety this inevitably brings. However, some element of apprehension can, in a small way, be a good thing as it helps to focus everyone on the task in hand and can be used in a positive way.
As well as our preparation internally with staff, we were also not afraid to bring in external expertise to help us prepare. This included Housing Quality Network (HQN), who came in to see us and provided some advice on key areas to consider and gave us some reassurance on the areas we had already identified as being important. We did, however, decide not to have a mock inspection as others have. We decided that we were aware enough of our strengths and weaknesses to know where we needed to concentrate our efforts.
We were also very well supported by our colleagues at L&Q Housing Trust, who had very recently been inspected themselves and at the time secured the best Audit result in London. People that had been involved in that inspection came and shared their experiences - things the inspectors liked, weaknesses they identified - and, most importantly, offered that independent, critical friend that is so useful in these situations.
The Audit Commission report identifies a number of key strengths and areas of good practise at Tower which helped us to achieve our 3 star rating. These included:
Even though we scored so highly there are always areas where it is possible to improve although gratifyingly very few were identified. These included:
We have made a commitment to our customers that we will be looking at these areas over the coming months, incorporating them into our business plans and reporting back on progress made.
The Audit Commission assessed Tower as having excellent prospects for improvement to achieve this because of our strong track record in the past of developing new products and improving services, our strong performance culture and leadership, a trend of improving KPI performance and our challenging and robust strategic plans.
We see the Audit Commission result as just the beginning of further plans to improve our services. Tower has a long established culture of excellence within the organisation that has been demonstrated by our long track record of success: we were the first low cost home ownership (LCHO) housing association to receive the Charter Mark for customer service, the first to win London Evening Standard awards and What House awards for design and have now won, in total, more than 20 recognised design awards. We also won the Sunday Times' Best Small Company To Work For award, in 2006.
This balanced score card of awards ensures we have a focus on customer service in all areas of our business with a constant driving ambition to adapt and improve the service we offer. We believe people engagement, as was shown during the lead up to audit, is absolutely key to our success and that happy, motivated and valued people will deliver great results.
Tower and our parent company, the L&Q Group, have a commitment to quality, customers and people and recognise that these values are what make good, long lasting organisations to ultimately achieve our mission statement, 'Creating places where people want to live.'
Steve Nunn, Director of Operations, Tower Homes Ltd.
