Demise of the Audit Commission

Is the death of the audit commission the end of red tape or useful regulation?

Judging by email comments on the Inside Housing website not many will mourn the surprise announcement that Eric Pickles is to scrap the Audit Commission. Up to now I thought they had done quite a good job but Uncle Eric thinks differently.

Coupled with the anticipated scrapping of the TSA where then should we look for future regulation? I find it hard to believe that the Coalition will tolerate the reintroduction of self-regulation. I have always had mixed feelings on regulation regarding it mainly as a constructive exercise but hard work for every one involved in the lead up to an inspection visit – and an awful fall-out if a poor rating is the result. There is a suggestion that much of the audit role could pass to the private sector and even that there could be a management buy out of part of the Commission. The only certainty at the moment seems to be unprecedented change which many will find very unwelcome. What, I wonder will be next week’s pronouncement? Could the Housing Ombudsman be given even more powers?

The Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) and Tenant Services Authority (TSA) launch its findings on ASB baseline survey

Following on from Kate’s blog last week, The Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) and Tenant Services Authority (TSA) launched its findings of their recent anti social behaviour (ASB) baseline survey, at the TSA stand of the annual CIH Conference in Harrogate.

The results of the survey show that tackling ASB remains a priority for social housing providers despite the economic downturn, but more can be done to make sure ASB services deliver value for money.

Training

Most organisations that completed the survey feel that they are delivering effective training to their staff. However, supporting victims and raising public confidence is an area that 42% of organisations feel needs improving. Also, 32% would like to develop their staff’s access to peer support networks.

The SLCNG offer a varying array of training courses for RSL’s in tackling ASB.

Benchmarking

Although most landlords undertake some level of benchmarking, 20% do not regularly compare their services with those of other organisations. The majority of landlords seem to be missing opportunities to network with and learn from each other, with only 30% of landlords reporting that they help networking with other local RPs.

ReACT in collaboration with HouseMark have a one button press submitter of Benchmarking KPI’s that allow users to compare themselves with similar organisations using the profiling filters provided by HouseMark.

Value for Money

Although the vast majority (80%) of landlords have not undertaken any cost-benefit analysis in relation to their work on tackling ASB, 62% believe that they would benefit from doing so.

ReACT allows users to log Case Costs and these can be split in line with the Respect Toolkit guidelines of measuring External legal costs, clean up costs and Internal costs in relation to the management of tackling anti social behaviour.

Tools and Powers

Sixty-three per cent of respondents felt that their organisation made full use of the tools and powers available. However 28% said that they could improve. Surprisingly, landlords indicated that they were most unfamiliar with areas such as Acceptable Behaviour Contracts, Closure Orders, Demotion Orders, Injunctions and Parenting Contracts/Orders.

The SLCNG provide training and guidance in relation to the tools available to landlords to tackle ASB. In addition ReACT allows users to record any orders served against perpetrators, and this vastly improves the landlords ability to review and monitor any breaches.

Victim-Centred Approach

The vast majority of landlords (80%) said that they take a victim-centred approach to ASB case reporting and have effective partnership arrangements in place with local support agencies. Sixty-three per cent of landlords also told us that they would benefit from advice and support to improve measures in identifying vulnerability and support to protect witnesses.

ReACT allows users to record and monitor where victim support has been given to complainants and witnesses, it also allows users to record where external agencies have been involved in this victim centred approach.

Speaking at the launch of the report, CIH Chief Executive Sarah Webb said “Anti Social Behaviour can have a dreadful impact on individuals and communities, and housing professionals are often at the forefront of trying to tackle it. This survey gives a good understanding of how social landlords are responding to the challenge of ASB and its causes; and it shows where vital support, including the ASB action team, and also our policy and practice and training teams, can best support providers to learn and improve.”

If you require any further information about how the ReACT, HouseMark and SLCNG teams can assist your organisation please do not hesitate contact us at;

Email:	info@react-asb.co.uk
Telephone:	+44 (0) 121 384 2513
Fax:	+44 (0) 121 377 6014

CIH Annual Conference 2010 Review

Kate, Mike and Paul on the ReACT stand at Harrogate

 

by  Mike Blomer  

The social housing world held its annual get together in Harrogate from the 21^st-24^th June with delegates and exhibitors alike speculating about what would be in store for us during the next few years. We had already heard that the TSA would probably fall victim to Government cut backs, that VAT would increase and benefits are to be cut. So with all of this in the background what would conference be like? And would the rumours of the conference leaving Harrogate in favour of Manchester turn out to be true?  

(We now understand that the conference will stay in Harrogate for the next 2 years, with the organisational responsibility moving to the CIH Events Team).  

Matching last year, ReACT shared a stand in Hall A with the Social Landlords Crime and Nuisance Group. This arrangement again proved to be very successful with Kate Hill, Paul Johns and myself ensuring that our part of the stand was staffed at all times. Tuesday morning proved to be the busiest period with the largest number of visitors to the stand over the three days of the event. It was certainly apparent that both delegate and visitor numbers were down on previous years – I will be interested to know the organisers take on this opinion.  

With  threat of cuts in allowances and development funding, we did not expect anti social behaviour to have a particularly high priority – but it did have an airing in the context of deprived communities and David Cameron’s “big society”.  

 The minister was not all that forthcoming. He confirmed that the TSA would be subject to early review (seemingly confirming its demise) and that the housing function of the Local Government Ombudsman could be merged with the Housing Ombudsman Service. In fact he gave a typical politicians address, saying much and giving nothing. We now await the autumn review.  

The social side of the Harrogate Conference was alive and well and, surprisingly for some, dominated by England v Slovenia in the World Cup! Even the conference agenda was temporarily suspended and the game shown live on a big screen in the main hall, with free alcoholic refreshments on offer to the 200 or so watching.  

I was invited by CIH to speak at the Ideas Exchange on “the use of systems for tackling ASB”. Open to exhibition visitors the session was held on all three days. First day there were 20 attending, 18 on day two and on the last day; 22, so it was not overwhelming. But any publicity etc., etc.  

ReACT Team Member Kate Hill, attending Harrogate for the first time said:-  

“Having heard so much about Harrogate my expectations were high and I was a little concerned I might have been let down. To my delight, it truly lived up to all the hype and talk I’d heard; a great buzz surrounded the halls, along with a true reflection of the positive attitudes in the housing industry despite the concerns ahead.   

I’m already looking forward to next year!”

What constitutes a good complaints system?

An informal flexible approach to managing complaints is recommended before moving on to your complaints process.

The procedure should be easy to follow and have as few stages as possible, aiming at completing the internal consideration of the complaint within weeks not months. It is, therefore, imperative that a complaint be escalated through the procedure promptly.

Ordinarily, the complaint should be first considered by a person responsible for the service against which the complaint is made, and whose responsibility is to investigate the claim and give a complete response.

If the complaint is not resolved, the complainant should be asked to give reasons.

Generally, the next stage should involve a manager or person with no functional responsibilities directly relevant to the service that is the subject of the complaint. The job at this stage is to check how the complaint was handled at first stage in the light of the reasons given by the complainant, and to see whether the matter could have been handled better – and, if so, whether the outcome should be different.

If the complaint remains unresolved, it should be considered by an independent panel as soon as possible within the organisation. Ideally, the panel should not be totally or mostly formed by salaried staff. The role of the panel is to review that:

• The procedure was followed,
• The complaint was dealt with as formulated by the complainant (or her/his authorised representative), and
• If a remedy was offered or actioned, it was proportional to the complainant.

Take a positive approach to complaints

You may want to encourage your tenants to give you feedback about the services you provide. Compliments are nice, but complaints can offer an invaluable early warning signal. They can alert you to problems before they get much worse and can also help you demonstrate that even when things go wrong you are able to act proactively. They can give you a good opportunity to build trust and understanding with your tenants. Even when complaints are not justified, they can still offer you the chance to manage the expectations and perceptions of your tenants more effectively.

Keep good records

There is no need to document every single item of information in the course of dealing with a complaint. What is important is to leave a comprehensive and clear trail of the key decisions and who made them, a good chronology, and adequate references to documents and evidence used to inform the case.

A well administered case file will help you, your colleagues who might have to review the case after you, the Ombudsman if he gets involved – and, above all, the complainant.

(All extracts were taken from the HouseMark Complaints guide produced in partnership with the Housing Ombudsman Service, January 2010)

ReSOLVE has been designed exclusively for social housing landlords who need a cost-effective, easy way to record and manage general complaints.

For more information on ReSOLVE please visit www.resolve-complaints.co.uk