Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
Transcript of Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
1/43
Strategic housing
servicesLondon Borough of Barking and Dagenham
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
2/43
The Audit Commission is an independent watchdog,
driv ing economy, efficiency and effectiveness in local
publ ic services to deliver better outcomes for everyone.
Our work across local government, health, housing,
community safety and f ire and rescue services means
that we have a unique perspective. We promote value for
money for taxpayers, audit ing the 200 bill ion spent by
11,000 local publ ic bodies.
As a force for improvement, we work in partnership
to assess local public services and make practical
recommendations for promoting a better quality of life
for local people.
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
3/43
Contents
Local authority housing inspections ...............................................................2Summary.............................................................................................................3Scoring the service............................................................................................5Recommendations .............................................................................................8Report ...............................................................................................................12
Context .......................................................................................................12Vision and strategic approach: how effectively do the Council and itspartners strategically plan work to balance the housing market anddevelop sustainable communities?.............................................................14Capacity to deliver: does the Council have the capacity to deliver itshousing vision effectively now and in the future? .......................................22Improving housing outcomes for the local community: is the strategicapproach to housing delivering better outcomes for the local community? 31
Appendix 1 Performance indicators.............................................................. 39Appendix 2 Reali ty checks undertaken ........................................................40
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 1
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
4/43
Local authority housing inspections
The Audit Commission is an independent body responsible for ensuring that
public money is spent economically, efficiently and effectively and delivers
high quality local services for the public.
Within the Audit Commission, the Housing Inspectorate inspects and
monitors the performance of a number of bodies and services. These
include local authority housing departments, local authorities administering
Supporting People programmes, arms length management organisations
and housing associations. Our key lines of enquiry (KLOE) set out the main
issues which we consider when forming our judgements on the quality of
services. The KLOE can be found on the Audit Commissions website at
www.audit-commission.gov.uk/housing.
This inspection has been carried out by the Housing Inspectorate using
powers under section 10 of the Local Government Act 1999 and is in line
with the Audit Commissions strategic regulation principles. In broad terms,
these principles look to minimise the burden of regulation while maximising
its impact. To meet these principles this inspection:
is proportionate to risk and the performance of the Council;
judges the quality of the service for service users and the value for
money of the service; promotes further improvements in the service; and
has cost no more than is necessary to safeguard the public interest.
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 2
http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/housinghttp://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/housing -
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
5/43
Summary
1 We have assessed the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham's
strategic housing service to be a fair, one-star service which has promising
prospects for improvement.
2 The Council's ambitions for housing are central to its wider vision for
regeneration of the borough and this is reflected well across its strategies
and plans. The Council has become only the fifth of 33 London authorities to
adopt its core strategy for future development, the housing elements of
which are informed by a sound understanding of the local housing market.
There is a strong focus on quality and sustainability in new housing
schemes and maximising the number of affordable homes built. i
Improvements to existing council housing take account of both the internal
and external environment in which residents live. To support housing's key
role in improving the lives of local people, the Council has re-directed some
resources for new and existing housing initiatives.
3 However, the Council has not always consulted its partners and the
community on all aspects of delivering its vision. There are some key gaps
in its strategic policy framework and in how well it shares data and makes
use of stock condition information on existing housing. Its approach to
meeting the diverse needs of the community and ensuring value for moneyin the service is underdeveloped. The Council has made limited progress in
enabling the number of new homes which are needed and in improving the
condition of Council and private sector housing in the borough. It provides
limited customer information on strategic housing services as a whole. The
adaptations and disabled facilities grants' service lacks customer focus.
4 A number of factors will support further improvement. Officers and
members champion the role of housing effectively. The Council's ability to
deliver its housing priorities has been enhanced by its housing plans which
are clearly aligned to current and emerging regional policy frameworks,
providing a strong framework for sustainable growth. Leadership of the
service has improved significantly over the last two years, supporting a clear
focus on ensuring the right capacity to deliver improvement. The Council is
self-aware, strives to overcome potential barriers and is open to new ways
of working to maintain the momentum for improvement. Over the next
20 years, projections for new housing and the land available for
development offer scope for the Council to significantly exceed its new build
targets.
i as a proportion of all new homes developed, on schemes where this is
viable
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 3
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
6/43
5 However, there are some barriers to improvement. The views of the
Council's partners are not always sought and understood and partnership
outcomes are not maximised. There are internal and external perceptions of
political resistance to considering some future options for improvement.
There are still significant gaps in the Council's performance management
framework and it has not yet finalised robust investment or riskmanagement plans. Some barriers to improvement are also outside the
Council's control. In particular, current uncertainty over future funding and
investment decisions mean it cannot be sure of the level of future resources
to deliver its aims. The national economic conditions are also hampering its
ability to attract development partners in an already challenging local
housing market.
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 4
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
7/43
Scoring the service
6 We have assessed the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham as
providing a fair, one-star strategic housing service that has promising
prospects for improvement. Our judgements are based on the evidence
obtained during the inspection and are outlined below.
Figure 1: Scoring chart i
Prospects for improvement?
Excellent
Promising Uncertain
Poor
A good
service?
Poor Fair
Good
Excellent
a fair service that has
promising prospects
for improvement
Source: Audit Commission
7 We found the service to be fair because it has a number of strengths,
including:
an ambitious vision for housing is at the forefront of regenerating the
borough and promoting sustainability. This is reflected well across key
strategies and plans;
a sound core strategy, informed by a strong understanding of the local
housing market, is informing the strategic approach;
community and environmental sustainability of new development is
supported by robust planning guidance and 'building for life'assessments;
affordable housing is maximisedii with a focus on social rented housing
for families, supporting a more effective balance in the housing market;
in some key areas, such as new build space standards and council
house improvements, the Council is focussing well on quality outcomes
for customers;
i the scoring chart displays performance in two dimensions. The horizontal
axis shows how good the service or function is now, on a scale ranging
from no stars for a service that is poor (at the left-hand end) to three stars
for an excellent service (right-hand end). The vertical axis shows theimprovement prospects of the service, also on a four-point scale.
ii as a proportion of the new housing developed on individual schemes,
where this is viable
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 5
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
8/43
new housing is well designed and sustainable; and
resources have been re-directed towards key housing priorities.
8 However, there are also a number of areas which require improvement.
These include:
some weaknesses in how effectively partners and the community are
consulted; gaps in the strategic policy framework and in the robustness and
effective use of stock condition information to help target resources
effectively;
an inconsistent approach to sharing intelligence and data with others;
limited clarity on how the needs of the borough's diverse community will
be met and weak arrangements to measure progress;
the Council's vision for private sector housing is not reflected in its
sustainable communities strategy;
limited progress in enabling the development of sufficient new homes to
meet local needs and in improving the quality of existing private sectorand council homes;
emerging progress in aspects of the private sector housing service are
balanced against significant areas which still need improvement;
a lack of customer focus, partnership working and effective
management of the adaptations and disabled facilities' grants services;
limited customer information on the services and assistance available;
and
an underdeveloped approach to value for money and maximising
resources.
9 The service has promising prospects for improvement because
strengths outweigh its weaknesses. These include:
housing is a key strategic priority for the Council, which it champions in
regional and sub-regional forums;
strategic housing proposals are closely aligned with regional priorities,
helping to maximise the potential for an increasing share of future
regional capital resources;
leadership of the service has improved significantly over the past two
years;
the Council has a strong focus on building the right capacity to deliverits housing priorities. Proposals for its future structure are seeking to
maximise this;
a pragmatic approach to developing new ways of working will help the
Council maximise the potential for improvements to be achieved;
momentum is maintained through an open approach to new ideas and
initiatives and a focus on identifying solutions and overcoming barriers;
self-awareness is strong. The Council clearly understands the
challenges it faces in future and the key strengths and weaknesses of
its current service;
the Council's local development framework and core strategy provide arobust strategic framework for sustainable growth; and
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 6
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
9/43
projections for new housing over the next five years exceed target
levels, with sufficient land identified to achieve the Council's targets over
the next 20 years.i
However, there are a number of barriers to improvement. These include:
some weaknesses in ensuring the views of all local partners and the
community are sought and understood and in maximising partnershipworking;
internal and external perceptions of some political resistance to
alternatives to Council led delivery of housing initiatives and housing
stock management;
significant gaps and weaknesses in the performance management
framework;
plans for improving the adaptations services which have not been
subject to consultation or challenge and lack improved customer focus;
future investment plans are not yet finalised and actions and alternative
options to mitigate known risks are not well developed; inconsistent arrangements for learning to help improve the service; and
uncertainty over investment decisions which are outside the Council's
control. In particular, the future council housing funding framework and
regional infrastructure funding which is critical for major regeneration
schemes to proceed. National economic conditions have also
exacerbated an already challenging local housing market.
i subject to regional investment in the infrastructure required to enable key
regeneration projects to proceed
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 7
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
10/43
Recommendations
10 To rise to the challenge of continuous improvement, organisations need
inspection reports that offer practical pointers for improvement. Our
recommendations identify the expected benefits for both local people and
the organisation. In addition, we identify the approximate costsi and indicate
the priority we place on each recommendation and key dates for delivering
these where they are considered appropriate. In this context, the inspection
team recommends that the Council shares the findings of this report with
residents and councillors; and takes action to address all weaknesses
identified in the report. The inspection team makes the following
recommendations.
Recommendation
R1 Strengthen the approach to developing and delivering the housing
vision and strategic priorities, by:
improving consultation to ensure the views of partners and the
community more effectively inform future priorities and proposals;
addressing weaknesses in sharing intelligence and data with
partners;
ensuring new and refreshed strategies and plans are more
robust, for example, by integrating outcome milestones, diversity,
value for money, risk and housing's contribution to quality of life
measures more clearly;
completing a comprehensive investment plan for the service,
which includes risk modelling as part of strategic plans; and
reviewing the sustainable communities' strategy to more clearly
reflect all aspects of the vision for sustainable housing within the
borough.
The expected benefit of this recommendation is:
a more robust strategic approach across the service which is fully
informed by the views of the Council's partners and residents and more
clearly demonstrates quality of life aspirations and outcomes for local
people.
The implementation of this recommendation will have high impact with low
costs. It should be implemented by March 2011.
i low cost is defined as less than 1 per cent of the annual service cost,
medium cost is between 1 and 5 per cent and high cost is over
5 per cent
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 8
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
11/43
Recommendation
R2 Improve outcomes for local people, including the most vulnerable, by:
improving the quality and accessibility of customer information to
ensure it is widely available and effectively targeted;
addressing the highlighted weaknesses in the private sectorhousing service to ensure a more proactive service is provided in
line with best practice;
revisiting the adaptations service review to ensure this addresses
the needs of vulnerable service users, from enquiry through to
completion of works, and reflects good practice within the housing
and health sectors; and
using service user feedback comprehensively, to inform
improvements.
The expected benefit of this recommendation is:
easily accessible services which better support those most in need.
The implementation of this recommendation will have high impact with low
costs. This should be implemented by March 2011.
Recommendation
R3 Better ensure the service meets the diverse needs of the community
by:
increasing awareness of variations in the community profile indifferent parts of the service, such as in private sector rented
housing;
integrating better diversity information into strategies and plans to
show current successes, what gaps exist and how these will be
addressed to meet the varying needs of different community
groups;
addressing the gaps and weaknesses in equality impact
assessments to maximise their potential for supporting and
measuring improvements; and
incorporating diversity indicators into the performance
management framework.
The expected benefit of this recommendation is:
greater clarity in the strategic approach to meeting the needs of the
community and better ability to measure and adapt services in response
to outcomes.
The implementation of this recommendation will have high impact with low
to medium costs. This should be implemented by March 2011.
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 9
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
12/43
Recommendation
R4 Improve the focus on value for money (VFM) within the service by:
developing a VFM and procurement framework for the strategic
housing service that supports, and is supported by, the corporate
approach;
prioritising a review of internal recharges to the service;
including efficiency targets in the service's performance
management framework;
routinely measuring the VFM-related impact of services and
initiatives;
benchmarking cost, performance and quality indicators to identify
areas for review and improvement; and
identifying internal and external resource opportunities (financial
and partners) within strategies and plans to ensure these are
maximised.
The expected benefit of this recommendation is:
a more structured approach to improving value for money, with more
potential for an increased level of efficiency savings to re-invest in
service delivery.
The implementation of this recommendation will have high impact with low
costs. This should be implemented by March 2011.
Recommendation
R5 Strengthen management of performance by:
developing a refreshed performance management framework for
the service which addresses the weaknesses highlighted in this
report;
identifying key milestones, focusing on sustainability and quality
of life outcomes for the community and incorporating these into
the strategic planning framework;
ensuring that robust risk management arrangements are part ofthe framework,
developing a scrutiny programme to review key aspects of the
service and challenge risk management within strategic plans;
and
implementing a more systematic approach to learning from
service users and the service's own experience.
The expected benefit of this recommendation is:
a stronger performance management framework which helps maximise
the scope for improvement.
The implementation of this recommendation will have high impact with low
costs. This should be implemented by March 2011.
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 10
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
13/43
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
14/43
Report
Context
The locality i
12 The London Borough of Barking and Dagenham is a small outer London
borough situated in the east of London. It is one of the most industrial parts
of the capital, being home to the large Ford Motors car plant in Dagenham
for over 80 years. However, large scale heavy industry has declined in the
area to be replaced by smaller service industries and manufacturing units.
13 The borough has a population of around 166,900 people, which isgrowing at a rate that is one of the fastest in England. It has above average
levels of both children and older people. At around 24.9 per cent, the
borough has fewer people from minority ethnic backgrounds than the
London averageii , although this is growing rapidly, as more people move
into the borough. This remains a sensitive local issue, with some groups
such as the British National Party, actively campaigning in the area.
14 The borough is the 11th most deprived area in England and 6th most
deprived of the 33 London boroughs. Of its 17 wards, 14 are among the
poorest in the country. ii i Educational attainment of adults in the borough is
comparatively low and though the level of test results and qualifications for
children at school are better, they are not strong.iv Unemployment is higher
than the London average, while average household incomes and wage
levels are among the lowest in the capital.v Despite relatively low house
prices and rentsvi , affordable housing is a key issue for many people
locally.
i data from 'Our Borough' and 'Key statistics' (January 2010) published bythe LBBD partnership, except where stated below
ii outer London: 29.31 per cent and London (region): 35.69 per cent
respectively. Figures relate to people classifying themselves as
'non-white' (not White: British; White: Irish or White:Other). Office for
national statistics, 2007-mid year estimates
ii i five wards are in the 10 per cent most deprived in the country, the other
nine in the 20 per cent most deprived.
iv the level of adults with no qualifications is almost double the London
average, while those with degree or equivalent qualifications are the
lowest in London. School examination and test results are just under the
national average.v c26,000 average income. Gross weekly wage of full time employees:
498.50 compared to 580.80 for London
vi typically around 25 per cent lower than London as a whole
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 12
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
15/43
15 A significant proportion of housing in the borough originates from
council built housing estates, many of which were built in the 1920s.
However, two-thirds of homes (68 per cent) are in the private sector, most of
which are owner occupied (58 per cent). The remaining properties are
mostly Council housing (28 per cent), with housing associations (RSLs)
managing relatively little stock (4 per cent). Since 2001, the number ofCouncil homes has declined rapidly as a result of the right to buy, while
private rented housing has almost doubled from 5.2 to 10 per cent of
housing in the area. i
The Council and the service
16 Barking and Dagenham Council is one of 33 London authorities. It
comprises 51 elected members, all Labour Councillors. The ruling party has
had a majority in the borough since 1964, but the single party composition
of councillors dates from the May 2010 local elections, when the Labour
party gained the 19 seats previously held by other groups. These included
12 seats previously held by the British National Party, which had until then
been the official opposition on the Council.
17 The London Borough of Barking and Dagenham is still a 'stock-holding'
housing authority. This means it has responsibility for both the 'landlord
service' to its 19,400 tenants and its statutory strategic housing role for the
borough as a whole.
18 The strategic housing service is part of the customer services
directorate of the Council. It reports to the housing portfolio holder, who is a
member of the cabinet, with a living and working board in place to provide
scrutiny of policy and performance.
19 Regeneration of large parts of the borough is planned or underway to
promote healthy living and economic renewal. This includes the south of the
borough, which is within the London Riverside area of the Thames Gateway
Regeneration Programme, one of the major development sites in the
capital. The Council's plans for regeneration include a considerable
increase in new housing over the next 25 years, in areas such as Barking
and Dagenham town centres and the Barking Riverside and Dagenham
South areas. However, the medium to long term viability of many parts ofthese plans is heavily dependant on infrastructure investment by regional
agencies, such as Transport for London, which is currently uncertain.
20 Land values in the borough are relatively low, but the cost of developing
new housing is similar to neighbouring boroughs. This makes it more
difficult to attract developers and other partners, as the financial viability of
development sites is often limited. This has become a more significant
challenge in the current economic climate.
i 2009 private sector stock condition report data compared to 2001 censusdata in the LBBD partnership key statistics. Most council house sales in
this period were prior to 2008, as sale levels fell sharply thereafter, due to
the recession
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 13
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
16/43
21 Between 2007 and 2010, the Council worked up plans for new housing
supply and improvement delivery arrangements for the borough, after being
selected by the government as one of only 14 authorities to pilot a 'local
housing company' initiative. However, this project and other pilots nationally
have not received the investment approval they need from the Homes and
Communities Agency (HCA)i to make them viable. In 2008, the Council was
also unsuccessful in bidding for additional resources through the private
finance initiative (pfi) to support estate renewal of several blocks of council
housing, where demolition and renewal is the most viable option.
22 This inspection focuses on key aspects of the Council's strategic
housing service: its roles in setting a strategic framework for housing in the
borough; in enabling new housing provision; and in making the best use of
existing private sector housing, including its approach to adaptations and
disabled facilities grants. We also inspected its strategic approach to
improving council owned homes. However, we did not look at its
homelessness and housing advice services or the effectiveness of itssupported housing provision in the borough.
Vision and strategic approach: how effectively do theCouncil and its partners strategically plan work tobalance the housing market and develop sustainablecommunities?
Is there an overarching and shared vision for housing which supports
wider ambitions for the community and is it championed effectively?
23 This is an area where the Council is performing adequately. It has an
ambitious vision for the regeneration of the borough, in which housing plays
a defining role. Housing has a strong internal profile and it is championed
well externally. Strategic plans are aligned to regional priorities,
demonstrating how they contribute to key objectives for London as a whole.
However, the Council is yet to ensure that its vision is shared by all key
partners and that it is well translated into a clear strategic framework. Some
key outcomes for local residents are not clearly articulated or integrated in
strategies and monitoring frameworks.
24 The Council's vision for housing shows clear ambition, with housing
seen as central to the achievement of the borough's wider objectives.
Housing and education form the two key components of the Council's
ambitions to regenerate the borough and improve the life prospects of the
community. They are cornerstones of the six prioritiesii within the borough
sustainable community strategy (SCS) and council corporate plan. They are
also well reflected in ambitious proposals to improve the health and wealth
of residents, such as the Council's key long term regeneration project to
i Homes and Communities Agency a national agency which provides
government funding for affordable housingii local strategic priorities in the SCS and corporate plan are safe, clean,
fair and respectful, prosperous and healthy and inspired and successful
young people.
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 14
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
17/43
transform Barking Riversidei from a derelict industrial site to the largest
housing development in the country. Housing is at the forefront of future
objectives.
25 The Council's focus on housing as a priority area is informed by a clear
understanding of the challenges it faces in balancing the housing market
and creating sustainable communities. This has led to a strong 'read across'between key strategies, policies and wider regeneration initiatives: all are
inter-dependant and support the same high level objectives. There is also a
strong recognition that the local context requires a sustained focus on
providing the right housing mix to improve choices for low income
households and support the borough's attraction to, and retention of, more
affluent people. This understanding has ensured that the LDF ii and core
strategy provide effective responses to these challenges, with plans for
affordable and market housing integrated into wider regeneration and
renewal ambitions.
26 Political support for improving housing outcomes is strong. Councillors
are considering a reduction in the number of strategic objectives, but
improving the quality and supply of housing remains a clear priority. The
housing portfolio holder and service steering groups ii i have maintained the
services' high profile and actively informed cabinet discussions. As a result
the cabinet has recently made some key decisions, including
re-prioritising its capital programme to support a higher level of housing
investment to pay for the redevelopment of large estates of council housing.
27 The Council is proactively championing the borough's role in meeting
regional housing needs. Its plans are aligned with current and future
proposals for the region, including an increased focus on the delivery of
socially rented, family sized homes. Key staff and members play an active
role in liaising with a range of agencies in London, such as the GLA, LDA
and LTGDCiv , and this has ensured support in developing its core strategy.
It is now developing a marketing strategy around this, to ensure a more
systematic approach and maximise opportunities for promoting its role. This
is crucial given increased regional competition for reducing resources.
Potential government changes in the investment roles of the London
Mayor's office could release extra resources but only where a borough's
proposals are seen to best match regional priorities.
i plans include the development of nearly 11,000 new homes combined
with new education, community and transport infrastructure, linked to
employment and environmental initiatives for Barking Riverside and
adjacent existing housing.
ii Local Development Framework: a collection of policies which outlines
how development will be managed in an area and which must be subject
to significant consultation by local people.
ii i development and private sector steering groups, where key councilmembers and officers discuss key policy issues
iv Greater London Authority, London Development Authority and London
Thames Gateway Development Corporation
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 15
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
18/43
28 The Council has taken positive steps to support delivery of its vision.
For example, it became one of 14 authorities in the country to be approved
to pilot a local housing company initiative. More recently it re-prioritised its
capital spending programme to provide resources to kick start estate
renewal in key council housing estates. The housing team in the borough is
relatively small so decisions like these require a significant commitment of
staff and financial resources. With few objections to new development, the
Council has not needed to make difficult decisions in light of local opposition
to development plans. However, it is clearly prepared to make tough
choices about resources to support housing as a priority.
29 The Council has not yet achieved a consensus of understanding and a
shared vision of how its housing aims can be delivered. The Council's key
development and regeneration partners widely support its overall objectives,
but they have not all been actively involved in shaping its related strategy
and policies. This is partly because until recently the Council has been
heavily focused on 'internal' proposals such as the local housing company(LHC) initiative. It has more to do to fully understand what current and
potential partners want and need. This is particularly important because the
borough will need to compete with neighbouring areas that may seem more
attractive locations to some investors. Effective dialogue will be crucial to
ensure long term buy in from partners and achieve better housing
outcomes.
30 Some key outcomes for local residents are not clearly articulated or
integrated in strategies and monitoring frameworks. For example, diversity
is recognised as important, but there is little clarity about what the range of
diverse housing needs are, how these will be met or how progress will be
measured. Additionally, the current SCS and local area agreement (LAA)
targets are limitedi , so do not reflect the importance of private sector
housing to both housing supply and quality outcomes, an issue now
recognised by the Council. The contribution housing makes to community
sustainability and to the quality of life of residents is also underdeveloped in
strategic goals and monitoring frameworks. These gaps make it hard for the
Council to be sure that housing outcomes are being maximised.
How effectively is partnership work ing and community consultationshaping and supporting delivery of the strategic approach to housing?
31 The Council is performing adequately in this area. It is working well with
key strategic partners to align its plans with regional policy and has
undertaken wide community consultation on its planning frameworks and
major development schemes. However, its consultation arrangements, with
both the community and other partners, are not consistently strong, leading
to variations in outcomes.
i focusing only on new housing (total and affordable) and decency levels in
council homes
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 16
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
19/43
32 The Council is actively involved in a number of regional and
sub-regional forums and partnerships to inform and lobby policy makers to
support its strategic objectives. It works well alongside the key GLA 'family'
of agencies. Liaison with the Mayor of London's office has resulted in a
reduction in the borough's proposed London housing plan targets to a level
the Council considers more realistic. Close working with the health servicehas enabled new health facilities to be recognised within the LDF and
incorporated into plans for schemes such as Barking Riverside. The Council
has also worked with Transport for London to ensure, where possible,
critical infrastructure requirementsi are delivered. Joint working has also
enabled it to access additional sub-regional resources, such as extra private
sector grant fundingii , and to take the lead on new initiatives, such as the
low carbon zone in Barking town centre. ii i This is helping to support the
Council's housing objectives.
33 Wide community consultation was undertaken in developing the corestrategy. Various written, verbal and electronic consultation methods have
been used to seek community views and the Council has dedicated
community communicators in place to help ensure the range of methods
reflects the diverse community. This includes different ways to attract the
views of minority groups and use of support agencies, faith groups and
networks in the borough to help maximise the opportunities for people to get
involved. The Council has faced little opposition to its proposals, with the
borough becoming only the fifth of 33 authorities in London to have adopted
its core strategy.
34 Effective arrangements are also in place to plan consultation on major
schemes. The Council invites members of the Council's residents' urban
design forumiv to review and assess planning design in major schemes
such as Barking Riverside, with feedback given to architects and planners.
There is also a pre-application process for major schemes which allows land
owners and their agents to informally discuss their proposals and plans with
council officers before formal applications are made. These arrangements
help support the planning process. There has so far been no major
opposition to any submitted planning applications.
35 Consultation on the strategic direction of some service areas isunderdeveloped. For example, the Council has only just re-started a private
i a number of decisions on infrastructure investment, which hold the key to
whether new housing can be delivered on the major schemes at Barking
Riverside and Dagenham South from 2015 onwards, are currently on
hold.
ii 140,000 to help reduce the level of category 1 health and safety rating
system hazards
ii i an initiative to reduce carbon emissions by 20.12 per cent by 2020
through support and assistance to residents, businesses, community
groups and schools and for residents, to help reduce fuel poverty (thoughno targets for this are defined)
iv six members of the Council's citizens panel, who have received training
in design issues, who meet every two months
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 17
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
20/43
sector housing landlords (PSH) forum and little innovation has been used to
consult partners, landlords or residents on its draft PSH strategy, with those
landlords we contacted unaware of the process. No consultation has taken
place about the adaptations service, either internallyi or with the home
improvement agencyii (HIA) and residents. This is despite the Council now
considering an options paper on future service delivery. In addition, while
council tenants have significant influence on the details of individual scheme
improvements where they live, they have so far had little involvement in the
significant changes made to the strategic approach to asset management or
development of the new draft strategy related to this. In some key areas,
partners and residents have not had effective opportunity to influence the
strategic direction and delivery of the service.
36 The Council has not yet made the most of what RSL partners could
offer. It has worked well with some individual RSLs on specific schemes, but
only where these are on private land. Strategically it has lacked effective
engagement to make sure it knows what these key partners want or needon a more collective basis. Input has been limited by the lack of effective
housing partner forumsii i to influence housing matters. The Council is not
ensuring it has a full range of views to inform its decisions and to make the
most of resources which may be available.
37 Inconsistent levels of partnership working have led to varying service
outcomes. For example, the Council has worked very closely with its
framework contractors to re-model improvement programmes in light of
resources being less than anticipated. This has maintained relationships
which could have become strained as the contractors' expected income wasreduced. However, the Council's adult and community services and housing
sections have not worked well together on adaptation services and there
has been no consultation with the HIA. This has resulted in a lack of shared
responsibility at the Council and missed opportunities to maximise funding
and improve the service for customers. The Council cannot demonstrate
partnership arrangements are always maximised.
Is there an up-to-date understanding of the housing market and
housing conditions, socio-economic data and the broader policy
context which informs the housing vision and strategic decisionmaking?
38 The Council is performing below minimum requirements in this area. It
works well in some ways with partners and stakeholders to share
intelligence, but in other areas its approach is weak. Its understanding and
i adaptations and disabled facilities grants are managed by the adult and
community services section of the Council on behalf of the housing
service
ii a local agency which provides help and support to residents making
applications for disabled facilities grantsii i for example, a previous RSL forum, which has not met for ten months
was ineffective and the Council has instead relied on discussions with
individual RSLs to communicate its plans
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 18
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
21/43
use of stock condition information is limited and information on the diverse
needs of local people is not well identified within its strategic plans and
targets. However, it does have a good understanding of the local housing
market and has undertaken a robust assessment of future land availability.
39 The effectiveness of the Council in sharing and challenging data is
mixed. It has worked with local strategic partners to share their intelligencearound future infrastructure needs for its development proposals around
education, health and transport, for example. However, data is not shared
with members in a meaningful way and limited comparison and sub-regional
data is shared with other Councils. The current status of the Council's
strategies and the absence of effective partner forums for the service mean
there is also little scope for wider data to be shared and its assumptions to
be challenged. This means the Council is not maximising the level and
robustness of the data available to enhance its strategic approach.
40 The robustness and use of stock condition information is
underdeveloped. Stock condition data for the Council's own stock is
outdated and a new survey is now underway. A report last yeari identified
problems with the reliability of the survey undertaken in 2005, concluding
that it was impossible to accurately forecast investment requirements. The
new survey could therefore make markedly different projections of the levels
of current and future component failureii and investment required. In
relation to the private sector stock, the Council's first stock condition survey
was completed in September 2009. This has given the Council a good
understanding of housing conditions in the sector and future needs for
investment. It plans to integrate details from both surveys in the respectivestrategiesii i as these are finalised. However, it currently lacks any asset
management tools to manipulate and model the findings, while data from
other initiatives, such as energy efficiency schemes, is collected but not
analysed on a strategic basis. So far the Council has not had up-to-date
information or a sophisticated approach to identifying and targeting its
resources.
41 Socio-economic data is not effectively translated to inform the Council's
strategic objectives. The Council has a good high level understanding of the
demographic and economic make up of the community, but this has not led
to targets or strategic milestones being put in place or measured.iv More
specific data on the individual needs of different community groups and
diversity strands are not well developed and little outcome information is
captured to ensure progress can be measured and policies amended. The
i stock condition data report (undated)
ii initial soundings from surveys so far suggest current data is not
extensively different from actual conditions, but changes in expected
standards and renewal rather than repair will significantly increase
required investment
ii i asset management and private sector housing strategies, which arecurrently being developed
iv the annual monitoring report includes some targets, but these are not
routinely monitored or revisited through the year
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 19
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
22/43
Council is not robust in ensuring its policies and plans meet the needs of
everyone in the community.
42 The Council has a good understanding of the local housing market. In
comparison with neighbouring boroughs, land costs are lower but
development costs similar. This has been exacerbated by the national
economic situation and often makes new housing difficult to justify infinancial terms. The Council commissioned a joint strategic housing market
assessment with other east London authorities and received the draft report
this summer. The reports findings build upon the outcomes from the
Councils own 2005 housing needs study and have influenced its current
thinking. A new housing needs survey is being undertaken this Autumn and
the results will feed into a new Housing Strategy, planned for publication in
early 2011. In the meantime the Council has a good awareness of changing
prices and shifts in social housing demand. A good understanding of local
housing market conditions is important in making sure strategies and plans
address identified housing needs.
43 The Council has a clear understanding of future land availability for new
housing in the borough. A strategic assessment has been undertaken which
identified sufficient land to provide the housing required under the London
housing plan targets and its core strategy until 2023/24. This has enabled it
to seek developer interest in sites such as Fresh Wharf, where planning
permission has been granted, and Abbey Retail Park, where a planning
application is anticipated. These sorts of sites will provide some of the more
significant levels of developmenti in the borough until infrastructure funding
gaps at larger regeneration schemes have been resolved.
Are there robust housing and planning strategies and policies which
support the delivery of housing priorities?
44 This is an area where the Council's performance is adequate. Its overall
housing plans and individual scheme proposals clearly identify how they
meet both the borough's and wider regional aims. The core strategy is
robust and community sustainability is supported by a range of planning
advice, which also helps to balance the type of housing provided in new
schemes against local needs. However, the strategic framework for
delivering outcomes across the service is currently underdeveloped and the
Council's approach to equality impact assessments is not yet robust.
45 The Council's overall strategic approach to future development is
effectively aligned with sub-regional and regional policy frameworks and
opportunities. Its alignment with regional policy has been reflected in the
core strategy and local development framework (LDF). At the same time,
individual scheme plans systematically draw out common themes both in
relation to housing and wider regeneration delivery. For example,
regeneration plans for Dagenham South and Barking Riverside highlight the
potential for providing large, sustainable, family housing along with neweducational and community facilities, while plans for Barking town centre
i the planned number of homes at Fresh Wharf and Abbey Retail Park
over the next five years, is 300 and 500 respectively
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 20
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
23/43
link housing development to the regeneration of the retail centre and
associated infrastructure. This aims to maximise support for the borough's
proposals and attract greater investment to support its plans.
46 Development of new homes is supported by a robust core strategy
which, after public examination, has now been adopted. The strategy
received support from the key London agencies and was non-controversiallocally as plans mainly relate to development sites which are remote from
existing housing, have been planned for many years and will enhance
community and open space facilities. They include the provision of schools,
health and other community facilities, while other LDF documents include
the Councils policies on space standards, sustainable construction and
design. All newly built homes have to meet lifetime homes and sustainability
standards. Planning policies provide a strategy for sustainable growth,
subject to the provision of the required social infrastructure.
47 Sustainability of new housing developments is supported by a range of
planning advice notes. Guidance is provided on sustainable construction,
waste and recycling and crime prevention. The Council's detailed advice
note on 'green roofs' won a commendation from the Royal Town Planning
Institute and has led to this feature being incorporated into designs for a
number of public buildings in the Barking Riverside scheme. The borough
also has two qualified 'building for life' assessors who have undertaken
assessments on all major schemes since 2008, linked to its commitment to
ensuring better life opportunities through regeneration. The Council is
incorporating environmental and community sustainability as a strong
feature of scheme design through clear planning criteria.
48 Planning guidance also supports the Council's priority to ensure the
right balance between market and affordable housing. Its targets to
maximise affordable housing provision and the split between housing for
social rent and intermediate market sale are consistent with the London
housing plan.i This, and design requirements, are clearly set out in a
specific planning advice note. This highlights the Council's commitment to
deliver the maximum amount of affordable, family sized housing in the
borough, but also offers pragmatism and flexibility so that individual
schemes can be assessed on their own merits.
49 However, there are weaknesses in the current housing strategies and
policies which provide the framework for strategic housing service delivery:
renewal of the Council's now expired housing strategy has not yet
started;
the Council's first private sector housing strategy is only at first draft
stage. Sub strategies and policies related to empty homes, affordable
warmth and houses in multiple occupation are basic or still in draft form;
and
work has begun on addressing the lack of a robust asset management
strategy in relation to the Council's own housing stock but is some wayfrom completion.
i the council aims for 50 per cent of new housing to be affordable where
this is financially viable, in a 70:30 rented:sale ratio
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 21
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
24/43
50 While the Council has plans to address these gaps, its timescales for
doing so are very challenging because a number of factors need to come
together to make this happen. These are both external such as the
Government's review of the housing revenue account funding arrangements
and further internal work, including the completion and analysis of the
housing needs survey and stock condition data, plus consultation with
stakeholders, which is only underway so far on the private sector housing
strategy. In each of the current strategies the Council lacks clarity on how
the plans contribute to its overall aims, clear milestones to support delivery
and the outcomes expected in relation to diversity and value for money.
They also do not adequately address how future funding risksi will be
managed. Current strategic documents do not therefore provide a robust
framework to demonstrate what needs to change, how this will happen or
how the Council will measure its success towards its stated aims.
51 Limited outcomes have been achieved through the Council's approach
to equality impact assessments (EIAs). They have been undertaken onsome key strategies and are self-critical, which has led to some
improvements, such as better translation arrangements for key documents.
However little has been measured in part because of a lack of baseline
data. Consultation to assess the impact of service delivery or whether new
or improved homes address the range of diverse needs in the community
has been limited. No EIAs have been undertaken in relation to council
house improvements or the adaptations service. At present EIAs do not
provide a robust assessment of the service's contribution to improving
equality and community cohesion in the borough.
Capacity to deliver: does the Council have the capacityto deliver its housing vision effectively now and in thefuture?
Are the right ski lls and tools in place to ensure effective delivery of
housing priorities?
52 This is an area where the Council is performing adequately. The
Council is focussing well on ensuring it has the right skills in place, both for
now and in a more challenging financial climate. This is supported by astrong approach to maximising the talent of the Council's workforce. It has
sufficient land to deliver its new housing targets. However, existing staff
skills to deliver improvement are not consistently strong. Some council
member development is also needed and the reasons for negative external
perceptions of political support for some housing options need to be
explored. Gaps in information technology are being addressed but are
currently weakening service delivery.
i key schemes depend on funding provided by other agencies. The
borough's investment plan is also still in draft
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 22
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
25/43
53 The Council has a strong focus on ensuring it has the right people to
deliver its housing priorities. It is currently reviewing its entire structure a
process which has been brought into sharper focus by the government's
announcements of reduced revenue funding. Final proposals have not yet
been agreed, but the Council is seeking to streamline its management
arrangements and focus on skillset matching to ensure the new structure iswell placed to deliver its strategic objectives. It is focussing on how its
capacity to deliver its housing plans can be enhanced, to take advantage of
new ways of working and to better exploit commissioning opportunities.
54 A positive strategic approach to building and retaining skills is helping to
boost capacity. The Council has a proactive approach to support staff, with
comprehensive training and development arrangements aligned to personal
and organisational development. Support and communication arrangements
have recently been enhanced in recognition of the impact of the current
economic climate and the challenging decisions that need to be made
around future staffing levels. The HR strategy is being renewed next year,
recognising that new ways of working need to continue to be supported
through effective people management. Currently soundings are being taken
with elected staff representatives, ahead of a planned staff survey which will
inform the strategy focus. This approach helps to maximise people's talents
and abilities.
55 The Council has sufficient land available to achieve its short and
medium term housing development targets. Its strategic land assessment
shows it has adequate land to provide the housing required under the
London housing plan targets and its core strategy until 2023/24. Although inthe medium to long term actual housing delivery is reliant on infrastructure
funding, this reduces the risk that development of new housing will stop
because suitable sites cannot be found.
56 Existing capacity to deliver the Council's plans is mixed. The right
capacity and extensive knowledge, skills and experience exist in some
areas of the service, such as planning and regeneration, capital programme
delivery and procurement. Sickness levels are also relatively low. However,
in some areas such as in housing strategy and private sector housing, staff
need development to promote greater capacity to improve. Internal jointworking also needs improvement in some areas, though not always for the
same reason. For example, the relationship between housing and adult and
community services is poor and so ineffective. In contrast, planning and
housing strategy staff work well together, but the teams are not co-located
and a lot of time is spent communicating and checking information between
the two functions. This increases inefficiency and opportunity costs. The
Council recognises this and plans to help address these issues through its
structural proposals. However, current capacity is only optimal in some
areas of the service.
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 23
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
26/43
57 Some development of Council member capacity is needed. The large
turnover of councillors in May 2010 means that there is need to ensure a
stronger awareness of future policy direction. Although there is some
understanding of this, there are internal and external perceptions that some
Councillors remain resistant to alternatives to Council-led delivery of
housing initiatives and future management of stock. Currently no Councillorsare members of the boards of any RSLs operating in the borough. The
authority needs to be sure all its Councillors have a realistic understanding
of how its proposals fit within the emerging policy environment, the range of
options available and the potentially challenging decisions that might need
to be made.
58 The Council is investing in new information technology to address
significant gaps in current systems. In particular, it is currently working to
implement new asset management databases for both council and private
sector housing data, including software to model investment decisions, to
record action taken and to enable better outcome reporting. These are not
in place currently, restricting the Council's ability to understand the potential
and actual impact of its decisions and make more effective use of its
resources.
Are effect ive arrangements in place to keep the delivery of housing
priorities on track and promote a culture of cont inuous improvement?
59 In this area the Council is performing adequately. Leadership of the
service is now strong. Senior officers and key elected members have a
strong awareness of what needs to be achieved and are focussed on findingsolutions and implementing new ways of working to drive forward
improvements. In some key areas a focus on service quality is delivering
positive outcomes for customers. However, there are significant
weaknesses in the performance management of the service overall and in
the adaptations service for vulnerable people, in particular. Risk
management and learning are also inconsistent, hindering the Council's
ability to maximise the improvements it can deliver.
60 Leadership of the service is now strong. It has improved significantly
over the past two years, with senior officers and key council members nowhaving a strong awareness of what the service does well and the key areas
for improvement. At corporate level there is also better understanding of
how the Council's revised structure and its commissioning ability will support
the service going forward. Managers are clear about priorities and are
implementing a systematic approach to improvement as part of current and
planned activities. This has, for example, already resulted in increased
private sector housing capacity and plans for better performance
management. Although current strategies and plans do not fully reflect this,
the service is led by officers who are proactively responding the challenges
the service faces.
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 24
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
27/43
61 Changes in the political make up of the Council have given a fresh
impetus to leadership, transparency and challenge to policy decisions. The
change to an unopposed ruling party could have created a vacuum in these
areas. However, new councillors have constructively challenged policy and
direction, leading to renewed debate around future housing proposals. This
has increased capacity for new thinking. The housing portfolio holder alsoshows a strong understanding and commitment to improving the quality and
supply of housing and achieving greater value for money. The Council's
commitment to housing has been retained while capacity for exploring better
ways to achieve its objectives has been increased.
62 In limited areas performance arrangements are effective. The Council
closely monitors the forward supply of housing sites, with its annual
monitoring report highlighted as best practice by the former Government
Office for London. Close monitoring is also in place for the Council housing
improvement programme, using a range of financial, quantitative and quality
indicators to track progress against programme targets. This provides key
monitoring information for the Council in these areas.
63 The Council's approach has also ensured customer focussed outcomes
in some key areas. For example, new council housing is designed to meet
space standards which significantly exceed minimum requirements and
more closely reflect emerging thinking by the Mayor's office on providing
greater living space for families. This is in preference to additional 'units'
being provided. Similarly, council house improvement schemes have been
designed with residents and incorporate wider security and environmental
improvements, for example, ahead of maximising the total number ofimprovements. Though this focus on quality is not applied universally, it
provides the community with some assurance that the Council is seeking to
achieve qualitative as well as quantitative outcomes.
64 Strong leadership has resulted in a focus on finding solutions and
overcoming barriers. The Council is not put off by significant challenges,
such as the deferred infrastructure decisions. Instead, planners and
regeneration officers continue to work closely with developers to achieve
better outcomes over the long term and to seek alternative options. For
example, the Council has now developed a new proposal for estate renewalafter failure of its PFI i funding bid. It responded to the failure of the LHC by
working closely with developers and the HCAii to get funding switched to its
council house building programme. This will provide the first new council
housing in the borough for over 20 years, with the first properties, at William
Street Quarter in Barking, due for completion towards the end of this
calendar year. This ensures momentum for improvement is not lost when
things do not go to plan.
i public finance initiative a former government model for private sectorinvestment in public sector led initiatives
ii Homes and Communities Agency a national agency which provides
government funding for affordable housing
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 25
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
28/43
65 The Council also takes opportunities to lead initiatives in the region. For
example, it was one of 14 authorities which volunteered for the local
housing company initiative nationally and has taken a lead on implementing
a community low carbon zone, with its initiative in Barking Town Centre
aiming to reduce carbon emissions by 20 per cent and support people in
fuel poverty. This approach means it is open to new ideas and initiatives to
help support its objectives.
66 Going forward, the Council has an emerging pragmatic approach to
delivering its housing ambitions. It recognises that it will need to consider
new ways of working, such as joint ventures, and to improve working
relationships with RSLs to make best use of their skills and experience and
access potential funding streams. It is also aware that different management
arrangements for its own stock i may be needed. There are some
perceptions that there is yet to be full political support for having all options
'on the table'. While this needs to be addressed, the Council has already
made some important decisions, such as the 7 million capital fundingcommitted to kickstart its estate renewal programme. There is a clear drive
towards exploring a wider range of options to achieve necessary
improvements.
67 But performance management arrangements are poor overall. The
Council is in the process of reviewing and improving its performance
arrangements for the service, but there are currently significant gaps in the
scope of reported information at both operational and strategic level. Few
strategic housing indicators are reported as part of current housing
performance reports, above team level. Additionally, while action plans aremonitored, the Council does not effectively assess whether this has led to
quality of life improvements or contributed to its wider objectivesii , as
strategies rarely feature clear success measures to assess this. Delivery
against existing housing strategy priorities have also not been publicly
reported and there is no scrutiny or external challenge of performance. The
Council's current performance management arrangements are not effective
in underpinning its progress towards key priorities.
68 Poor management of the DFG and adaptations service has resulted in
poor customer and value for money outcomes. Ineffective control has
resulted in lost funding, poor service delivery and a lack of integration
across service areas. The Council is now reviewing this service and has
completed an options paper on its future. However, the robustness of this is
undermined by a lack of challenge. For example, there is still limited
communication between the adult and community services team ii i and
housing services about the arrangements and no consultation with service
users, community groups or the current HIA service provider has yet taken
i subject to stock options appraisal and consultation with residents
ii there is some reference in the annual monitoring report, but this is onlymonitored annually, 12 months after year end.
ii i which administers major adaptation grant funding and adaptations to
council homes on behalf of the housing service
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 26
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
29/43
place. It is not possible to determine how well the Council will achieve
improvements that customers will recognise in this area.
69 Risk management arrangements are mixed. The Council has a strong
corporate approach to risk and this is translated into divisional and service
based risk plans. Senior managers are well aware of the risks for the
housing service going forward and have put into place some effectiveactions to mitigate them. However, some of the significant risks to the
service are not well documented in current strategies and plans and there
has also been little scrutiny of these or the strategic housing service as a
whole through the Council's scrutiny board.i The Council is not ensuring an
agreed approach to mitigating risks and alternative solutions is in place.
70 Arrangements for learning are also mixed. The Council can
demonstrate some learning from other organisations, which has led to a
clear awareness of what excellence should look like in some areas of the
service. However, it has weak arrangements for learning from its own
experience. Its approach to seeking customer feedback is limited and it
does not have systematic processes for measuring 'quality of life' impacts
from projects and initiatives it is involved in or funding. The Council is
missing opportunities to identify good practice and areas for improvement to
feed into future initiatives and proposals.
Does the Counci l plan its finances and other resources robust ly, to
support the effective delivery of its strategic housing priorities and
achieve value for money?
71 The Council is performing below minimum requirements in this area. Itis not ensuring value for money (VFM) within the service, as it lacks a
strategic framework, targets and comparative data and is poor at analysing
the VFM of initiatives it has invested in. Although improving, it has not
ensured it maximises external resources and its spending decisions are not
informed by robust investment plans. It has however sought to positively
influence future government decisions on council housing revenue funding
and has successfully attracted some resources from national and
sub-regional housing funding schemes. It has also re-directed some
resources to support housing outcomes. Planning processes help deliver
better outcomes from local developments.
72 The Council is not ensuring value for money in its strategic housing
services. It was assessed as having an 'adequate' approach in its corporate
use of resources in 2009 ii , but this is not translated into a clear approach at
service level. The service does not have a clear strategic approach to
promote value for money and lacks any benchmarking data to show
comparative quality, performance or cost, except in the planning service. It
i membership of the 'living and working board' has changed significantly
as a result of the May 2010 elections. It is now developing its knowledge
and understanding to help it provide a more effective challenge goingforward
ii December 2009 Annual Audit Letter to the Council (from the Audit
Commission) based on 2008/09 annual audit
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 27
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
30/43
has no efficiency targets at service level to support wider corporate aims.
While some tentative steps are being taken to improve its approach, there is
no service framework in place to guide this. The Council cannot
demonstrate a structured assessment of whether services provide value for
money or how they will improve.
73 Funding streams have not always been maximised to increaseresources. For example, the Council has missed opportunities to claim
around 1.5 million of additional external disabled facilities grant funding
over the past three years, while it also underspent private sector grant
funding until last year. Few loans are provided in place of improvement
grants to recycle funding, nor does it charge any fees for its private sector
work. Internal recharges for services provided by other departments have
not been reviewed systematically, with some estimates that this could save
at least 4 million each year. Some steps are being taken to improve this,
but as current strategies and action plans lack clarity about the level of
resources required, it is not clear how effectively this will change in future.
74 Partnerships have not been evaluated in relation to value for money.
The Council has not undertaken a review of internal and external
partnerships to assess how effectively they are helping to deliver shared
priorities for housing. It has not used existing strategies and targets to
formally sign up internal or external partners, such as PCTsi , the HIA and
RSLs, to delivery, sharing responsibilities for targets or identifying
opportunities to share resources. As a result it is missing opportunities to
maximise the contribution of partners in delivering the vision for the area.
75 The Council cannot be certain it has the financial resources to deliver itshousing plans. A number of key proposals ii rely almost entirely on funding
and investment decisions from other agencies. The Council needs a
favourable outcome from the government's review of housing revenue
account fundingii i to ensure the financial viability of its stock and housing
management service and to lever in other funding. It needs, for example,
38 million to bridge the funding gap for its estate renewal programme,
between the 7 million it has committed and the total cost. It anticipates the
review outcome will help, but the level of headroom it will generate is
expected to be limited. Its major regeneration schemes are also constrained
by a lack of approved funding for major infrastructure. Some investment
decisions have been deferred and other funding cannot be guaranteed. iv
This could result in the Council being unable to achieve the desired
improvements at its major regeneration sites and only a small percentage of
the homes it has planned.
i Primary Care Trusts (within the NHS
ii including new housing delivery, estate renewal and investment in
maintenance of council housing.
ii i a national review of how council house management and maintenance isfunded.
iv such as the Docklands Light Railway extension and later phases of the
proposed bus service
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 28
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
31/43
76 Spending decisions are not yet informed by robust proposals for
housing investment. The Council has drafted a borough investment plan,
but this is not yet complete and it lacks clarity on investment in housing
services other than major projects. Budgets for key services, such as private
sector housing and disabled facilities grants, have not been assessed either
in terms of what they have delivered to date or against actual and potentialdemand, despite significant previous under and over spends respectively.
Resources are not clearly identified against any strategic proposals and
strategies do not target resources to particular areas or groups. The Council
cannot be certain if its resources match its priorities.
77 The impact of initiatives and funding decisions is not routinely captured.
Individual teams often monitor the number of outputs, such as private sector
interventions or new homes built, but the Council rarely captures the actual
impact of delivery on local people. For example, it has improved housing in
unpopular areas where turnover has been high due to significant actual or
perceived levels of anti-social behaviour (ASB) and crime. However, it does
not know whether the new or improved housing has led to more sustainable
communities or reduced ASB, crime levels or perceptions of crime. Similarly
it has little information on changes made at a local level, such as private
sector housing improvements. Little strategic housing service data is
captured in corporate performance reports. This limits its ability to
understand the contribution to the Council's overall objectives or to evaluate
whether resource levels are appropriate.
78 The Council has sought to maximise outcomes from the government's
review of housing revenue funding. It has played a positive role indiscussions with government officials, submitting proposals which offer
realistic options for the Treasury to consider. While the actual outcome of
the review is out of the Council's hands, it has played a constructive role in
seeking to secure the best outcomes the borough can achieve.
79 The Council has successfully secured some external funding for new
housing. It was successful in seeking approval from the HCA to switch
NAHPi funding from the LHC to its own house building programme.
Together with funding for RSL schemes, this is expected to total around
18.5 million between 2009/10 and 2010/11. Uncertainty about theoutcomes of the government's forthcoming spending review makes it
difficult to predict how much of future planned NAHP fundsii will be made
available. However, the Council hopes that proposed changes in the
planning, funding and delivery of new homes in London will improve its
funding prospects, particularly as it has closely aligned its plans with the
region's identified priorities.
i national affordable housing programme
ii of between 105.5 million and 165.8 million, over the next four years
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 29
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
32/43
80 Some sub-regional funding has been attracted for private sector
housing work. For example, 1.6 million has been secured to support
bringing empty homes back into use, along with 140,000 to address high
risk safety hazards in housing occupied by vulnerable people. The Council
is also bidding for 're-new' energy efficiency funding to improve the thermal
efficiency of dwellings. This supplements the Council's own resources toimprove outcomes.
81 Some resources have been re-directed to service priorities and are
planned to do so in future. For example, the Council created additional
posts for the private sector housing team in recognition of its higher profile
and it has also committed 7 million to kickstart estate renewal. It provided
funds for a new primary school as part of the Barking Riverside
development, in light of cancelled BSF funding.i It has also withdrawn some
land disposal plans so that the necessary infrastructure can be provided
which support its housing plans or used other sites for housing development
directly.ii Its draft investment plans mean housing will be second only to
education in capital funding allocations, with 76.6 million earmarked for
housing over the next four years. The Council is targeting resources to
support improvements in the housing service.
82 Planning processes support value for money in the delivery of strategic
housing objectives. Clear guidance is provided which sets out expectations
and these help ensure that suitable infrastructure and community facilities
are provided, promotes the right quality standards and helps maximise the
level of affordable housing achieved. This helps deliver better outcomes
from developments in the borough.
Do the Council's commissioning and procurement arrangements for
strategic housing delivery help to maximise value for money and
sustainability?
83 The Council's performance in this area is below minimum requirements.
Despite some procurement activity which may have improved VFM, the
Council is not analysing outcomes to ensure this is the case. In can
however demonstrate reduced commissioning fees for some work. It is
supporting greater sustainability through existing and planned procurementactivity.
i Building schools for the future' funding was cancelled following the
government's review of the BSF programme
ii for example, the St George's Centre and Canington Road sites are nowearmarked for new primary schools and unviable council garage sites
have been used for the provision of new three and four bedroom social
rented homes
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 30
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
33/43
84 The Council cannot demonstrate value for money improvements as a
result of its procurement arrangements. Despite procurement and supply
chain management activity related to the council home improvement
programme and joint procurement of the SHMA, the Council lacks any data
to quantify the related savings or added value offered. Benchmarking of
costs and service outcomes is extremely limited. A new procurementexercise is planned for 2011 when the existing council home improvement
contracts end. Work is now taking place to check what new opportunities
might exist, such as collaborative procurement with neighbouring authorities
or more emphasis on sustainability and local employment. However, the
Council cannot currently demonstrate positive outcomes from its
procurement choices.
85 Preliminary costs and fees for commissioning capital housing projects
have reduced significantly. In 2007/08 they totalled 2.6 million, but reduced
to 0.95 million, (a fall of 63 per cent) by this year, taking account of
changes in the size of programmes in place. The Council lacks a breakdown
of the different savings for different projects, but this has resulted in extra
resources to invest in service delivery.
86 Sustainability is reflected in some commissioning and procurement
activity. In particular, the Council's improvement programme is now based
on schemes which consider the safety and security of residents and
environmental wellbeing. Specifications have been changed and the life
cycle of materials is taken into account in material choices. This helps to
promote greater value for money through more sustainable communities
and reduced renewal and repair costs over the long term.
87 The Council is considering providing minor adaptation equipment at
accredited retail outlets. It is expanding the current provision of mobility aids
at local specialist outlets to provide people with quick and easy local access
to adaptations on a 'prescription' basis. This can help to increase access
and reduce waiting times for adaptations, helping to maintain independence
in people's own homes.
Improving housing outcomes for the local community:
is the strategic approach to housing delivering betteroutcomes for the local community?
Is new market and affordable housing offering greater choice for new
and existing households and promoting sustainable communities?
88 This is an area where the Council is performing adequately. In future
years the Council's plans for new housing development provide scope for it
to significantly exceed the targets set out in the draft London Plan. It
continues to push for the maximum level of affordable housing that is viable
on new schemes and has a strong focus on quality and sustainability within
new housing developments. However, its recent track record in delivering
new homes and affordable properties is not strong and it lacks clarity on
Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 31
-
7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs
34/43
how it is meeting or planning to meet the housing needs of everyone in the
community.
89 Going forward, the Council predicts significant improvement in the level
of new homes it enables. Between 2011/12 and 2014/15, it expects new
housing supply to average between 1,242 and 1,479 properties i annually,
significantly exceeding the new proposed annual target of 1,065 properties.It also has the land available to deliver a similar level of homes for the
following 15 years, although much of the ongoing development is subject to
infrastructure in