|
|
||||||||||
|
UPDATE Towards a Single Social Housing Sector In this article, first published in 1999, John Harvey (Managing Director of IRIS Consulting) critiques the Government’s current approach to applying PIs to both local housing authorities and RSLs. Convergence between the council housing sector and the housing associations sector is taking place on a number of fronts. This convergence is being brought about not just by formal transfers (both LSVT and partial) but also by the pressures to align rent levels and the application of common performance indicators. The “Best Value in Housing Framework” document published by the former DETR in 1999 stated: “There is a shared commitment between DETR and the other organisations represented on the Best Value in Housing Steering Group to maximise the read across on housing performance indicators between local authorities and RSLs. …This cannot happen overnight.” (paragraphs 6.46-6.47). The preliminary task of developing suitable PIs and setting targets against them poses a number of challenges in itself for many people involved in the housing sector. These challenges involve not just agreeing common definitions of terms but also in collecting relevant data. Experience from other similar exercises tells us that what gets defined as a PI tend to be those matters on which there is some readily available data – rather than what really matters to the customers. What can be counted gets measured and served up as the PI. So let’s look at what the national Best Value Housing performance indicators are. The former DETR specified 17 national PIs for housing for the year 2000/2001. They were grouped under the following five headings:
In addition local authorities are advised to develop local performance
indicators which should reflect local priorities and circumstances.
Targets for improvement should be set and monitored for all these PIs
– national and local. The Framework document contains a useful Action Checklist which points
local authorities to the steps they need to take to get their PIs in place.
This urges all authorities to do the following:
All these steps are sound and appropriate. But to do them properly requires substantial effort and energy from each housing organisation. The key issue will be to demonstrate adequate and improving levels of customer satisfaction – especially tenant satisfaction. In order to collect data on this the Government has urged local authorities to adopt the National Housing Federation’s STATUS standard tenant satisfaction survey methodology. This again “will help facilitate read across between local authority and RSL landlords”. The recurring theme throughout is that both local authority and RSL housing sectors are being treated as an entity. This same message was contained in the Housing Green Paper “Quality and Choice: A Decent Home for All”. The advent of local “arms-length” management companies will hasten the trend and blur the distinction between RSLs and local authorities. For many tenants already there is no difference. It looks as if those in the social housing sector will need to catch-up with their customer’s perceptions pretty quickly. |
||||||||||
|
© IRIS Consulting. 4 Ganton Street, Soho, London, W1F 7QL tel 07973 414 669 e-mail: johnharvey@irisconsulting.co.uk or marilyntyzack@irisconsulting.co.uk |