St George's Response to Audit Commission Report

A joint statement from John Robb, Chair of the Board, and Steve Shynn, Interim Chief Executive of St Georges Community Housing in response to the 'fair' housing inspection report from the Audit Commission reads as follows:

"As many of you will know, the Audit Commission inspected St Georges Community Housing in January 2008. The results of that inspection have said that we provide a one-star ‘fair’ service, with promising prospects for improvement.

"The Audit Commission findings are generally positive, recognising the many strengths of the organisation and the improvements SGCH has already made. These include:

"1. Improved customer satisfaction, with particularly high satisfaction with Sheltered, Home Ownership, Voids and Aids and Adaptations services.

"2. Local offices are welcoming, staff are helpful and information provided for residents is of a good quality.

"3. Effective partnerships are in place, working to deal with anti-social behaviour, with flexible resources to improve tenancy enforcement and estate environments.

"The Audit Commission also said that the organisation has a robust system of performance management, which ensures areas for improvement are identified and it was acknowledged that significant progress has been made against key performance indicators and the aims of the Annual Improvement Plan.

"St Georges Community Housing is now well placed to achieving two stars, which will release the £143 million bid for government funding that will be used to improve the condition of Council homes. An early re-inspection has been requested.

"The Audit Commission have highlighted areas where we can enhance our services, and we will focus on these areas over the coming months. These improvements include:

"1. Increasing resident involvement, offering a menu of options so that they can have more say in how SGCH is run.

"2. Improve processes for identifying and supporting vulnerable residents.

"3. Review responsive and planned repairs services to meet customer needs and provide value for money.

"SGCH will also be improving the way it deals with and learns from customer complaints.

"The report concluded that SGCH has a positive and constructive relationship with the Council and has the leadership and staff commitment to deliver changes and improvements. We are committed to making sure our residents receive the best services possible, while achieving the government’s Decent Homes standard."

The following is extracted from the Audit Commission's own summary of the findings of the report:

1 St Georges Community Housing provides a fair service, which has promising prospects for improvement.

2 Satisfaction with services provided has improved markedly for tenants and leaseholders. Local housing offices and the Tenant Resource Centre provide a comfortable and welcoming environment for customers. The ALMO has created a distinct identity, which is reinforced through good quality publicity. SGCH works well with its partners, particularly in relation to antisocial behaviour. Sheltered housing is popular with residents. There is a corporate commitment to equalities and diversity, and the profiling of residents is making it possible to tailor services to individual needs through, for example, floating support services. Smaller aids and adaptations are provided quickly to those in need.

3 However, there are a number of areas which require further improvement. The level of complaints, although reduced, remains high, and there are significant areas of dissatisfaction in terms of leasehold service, responsive repairs and major works. More than 90 per cent of telephone calls (excluding the repairs call centre) are answered within target times; however, telephone answering at the repairs call centre does not meet targets. Frontline staff are not always fully aware of policies and procedures. Residents are consulted, but not fully involved in, decision making, and the current structure of resident participation makes it difficult to engage the wider body of residents and hard-to-reach groups. The ALMO has been slow to take action against tenants who have not allowed access for gas servicing, and tenants wait a long time for major aids and adaptations. The quality of cleaning is variable, and residents are unsure what standard of cleaning to expect. Value for money considerations are not fully embedded in the operation or plans of the organisation. The proportion of rent collected has remained static.

4 There are promising prospects for further improvement in services. The ALMO has a constructive relationship with the Council. There have been measurable improvements since the ALMO was set up. Progress has been made against many key performance indicators, and against the aims of the improvement plan. The ALMO is developing the ways it learns from residents, and these are feeding into its service plans. Good capacity at management and board level are helping to drive these improvements.

5 However, there are some barriers to improvement. In some areas, performance has not improved. Not all plans are fully developed, and many do not address value for money to any significant extent. The Council and ALMO have a commitment to realising the benefits of procurement, partnering and improved information technology, but have not yet fully developed their approach to these areas.

Scoring the service

6 We have assessed St Georges Community Housing as providing a ‘fair’, one-star service that has promising prospects for improvement. Our judgements are based on the evidence obtained during the inspection and are outlined below.

7 We found the service to be fair because it has a range of strengths including:
- overall satisfaction with services among tenants is high;
- residents have a wide range of ways to pay rent and otherwise contact the ALMO;
- there is a generally welcoming and comfortable environment at local offices, and staff are helpful;
- information provided to residents is generally of a good quality;
- the process of profiling the needs of residents is progressing well, and floating support services are tailored towards individual needs;
- there is a positive relationship with Housing Benefits and organisations providing welfare benefits services;
- the Tenants Resource Centre provides useful services to local residents;
- effective partnership working to deal with ASB is producing measurable outcomes for residents;
- the Community Warden service provides a flexible and effective resource to improve tenancy enforcement and estate environments;
- the repairs handyperson provides a helpful and popular service for older residents;
- estate inspections are thorough;
voids repairs are carried out to a standard agreed with residents, and satisfaction is high;
- sheltered housing services, including the emergency call-out line, is popular with residents;
- satisfaction with the Home Ownership Team is high;
- the review of Service Level Agreements has identified substantial savings;
- voids partnering has reduced costs;
- minor aids and adaptations are carried out quickly, and satisfaction is high once adaptations are fitted;
- residents have benefited from an active programme of installing new boilers and double glazing;
- the ALMO has robust data to inform its improvement programmes.

8 However, there are some areas which require improvement. These include:
- local offices have limited opening hours;
- the time taken to answer telephones at the repairs call centre does not meet targets;
- there are high levels of complaints;
- the proportion of rent collected has remained static;
- residents have to wait for some weeks for an appointment at the welfare benefits surgery;
- the process of collecting rent is not adequately targeted to prevent and address arrears;
- staff do not consistently have adequate knowledge of policies and procedures;
- the current resident participation structure does not encourage the involvement of hard-to-reach groups;
- the focus of participation is on consulting residents, rather than involving them in the decision-making process;
- legal action in cases of non-access for gas servicing is limited;
- the ALMO has not developed links between housing management and the gas/asbestos programmes to address issues of non-access and vulnerability;
- tenants wait for long periods for major aids and adaptations works;
- the level of post inspections is high;
- the level of planned works is declining, and is not focussed on resident priorities;
- satisfaction rates for major and planned works is not high;
- processes to deal with disputes with leaseholders are limited;
- examples of outcomes form partnering and joint procurement are limited;
- value for money is not fully embedded across the organisation;
- a complex system of estate cleaning has resulted in variable standards, and a lack of accountability;
- the level of responsive repairs relative to planned repairs is high;
- residents have not been actively involved in prioritising Decent Homes works;
- the outcomes of equal opportunity and diversity policies are not fully developed.

9 The service has promising prospects for improvement because:
- there has been significant improvement in the satisfaction of tenants and leaseholders with overall services;
- there has been progress against key performance targets, particularly those relating to repairs;
- the organisation has developed a distinct identity, for example through revised and improved publications;
- public offices have been re-branded and improved;
- there is measurable progress against the aims of the annual improvement plan, including the introduction of mystery shopping, development of Equality Impact Assessments and customer profiling;
- a robust system of performance management allows the organisation to identify areas which need improvement;
- learning from complaints has improved;
- there is good capacity at management level, and within the Management Board;
- there is a constructive relationship with the Council;
- the training plan is robust, and links well to organisational aims;
- partnership working has improved capacity to achieve progress.

10 However, there are a number of barriers to improvement. These include:
- some performance targets have not been achieved, and performance in some areas has worsened;
- there are significant issues of dissatisfaction in terms of leasehold services and repairs;
- not all plans are SMART (Specific, measurable, achievable, resourced, time-bound);
- plans are not integrated with VFM targets;
- there has been limited progress in procurement and partnering;
- there is no ICT strategy in place.