KPI Benchmarking Subgroup by 9713UUdo

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 16

									              NW Equality and Diversity KPI Benchmarking

                              A summary report by

              Aziza Kapadia, Equality and Diversity Officer,

                           Mosscare Housing Group

                                    8 June 2009




9d84ec9f-1a03-4a8f-b497-303720151959.docPage 1 of   16
Contents page




Aims and objectives                                      3


Subgroup membership                                      3


Lead contact                                             3


Our thanks to                                            3


Some background                                          4


The process involved                                     4


The next step                                            6


The proforma (electronic version available)              7




9d84ec9f-1a03-4a8f-b497-303720151959.docPage 2 of   16
Aim:

To benchmark equality and diversity key performance indicator data and set regional
and national targets for six equality strands extending in the future, to seven strands.


Objectives:

      To develop a benchmarking proforma and to pilot this in our organisations

      To link in with regional E&D Groups to enable national benchmarking

      To develop a partnership for ‘number crunching’ and promotion


Subgroup members:

   1. Aziza Kapadia, Equality and Diversity Officer, Mosscare Housing Group
   2. Caroline Jackson, E&D and Support Manager, Rochdale Borough Housing
   3. Jean Broster, Equality & Diversity Officer, Muir Group
   4. John Taylor, Governance & Regulation Manager, St Vincent’s Housing
   5. Lee Bloomfield, Head of Neighbourhood Services, Eastland’s Homes
   6. Melanie Sheargold, Quality & Performance Manager, Regenda Group
   7. Oriel Gordon, Head of Performance & Quality, Cheshire Peaks & Plains HT
   8. Samantha Miller, Chief Executive, Housing Diversity Network
   9. Shoab Akhtar, Diversity Officer, Places for People
   10. Tara Kelly, Equality & Diversity Officer, Northwards Housing



Lead contact for further information:

Aziza Kapadia, Equality and Diversity Officer of Mosscare Housing Group
Email: Aziza.Kapadia@mosscare.org.uk            Tel: 0161 226 4211


Our thanks to:

With thanks to the subgroup for discussion leading to the development of the
proforma and for your role in piloting it. Thanks to Sam Miller who helped
enormously with coordinating the work of regional E&D groups so we can edge
toward national benchmarking and for her liaison with HouseMark.

Our thanks to the wider Network membership for helping us to develop the
benchmarking proforma by forwarding on their KPI monitoring templates.




9d84ec9f-1a03-4a8f-b497-303720151959.docPage 3 of   16
Some background

As social housing landlords, we are required to collate, monitor and report on our
equality and diversity performance through key performance indicators across all
operational areas as per regulatory requirement; Audit Commission KLOE 31 and
Housing Corporation Good Practice Note 8.

However, aside from the 2001 census data available for race, there are no official
targets available for age, disability, gender, religion or belief and sexual orientation.
In the absence of targets, it proves difficult to reliably measure performance.

There are a number of solutions. We could pluck targets out of the air which would
be quite meaningless. We could arrive at targets through reflective practice based
on our organisational trend but this would only measure our own past performance.
We could use data compiled by third sector organisations i.e. Lesbian and Gay
Foundation and Employers Forum for Age. But this would not give us a comparative
like for like benchmark for social housing.

Aziza considered a way forward would be to work together and pool our E&D KPI
data to develop regional benchmarking ourselves from which we could derive
regional targets for the 6 equality strands. The benchmarking could be general or
more specific with comparison between like for like social housing organisations i.e.
Almos and Almos and RSL’s and RSL’s and further, based on unit size. Clearly, the
feasibility of this would require a significant amount of participation.

Early enquiries made by Aziza with Mark Elsworth, the Audit Commission’s Lead
Inspector indicated that to his knowledge, this work had not been progressed in any
other region and, as such, it was innovative.

Aziza took forward the KPI benchmarking idea to the NW Equality and Diversity
Network for Housing Practitioners (NWE&DHP) and the idea was welcomed. A KPI
subgroup developed to progress this work.


The process involved


A. Subgroup meetings:

The subgroup met for three focused meetings:

   1. 25 November 2008
   2. 26 January 2009
   3. 16 March 2009

The process involved, drafting a proforma and all subgroup members took part in
introducing it to their colleagues and piloting this in their organisations. We shared
our trouble shooting experiences and developed draft 3.




9d84ec9f-1a03-4a8f-b497-303720151959.docPage 4 of   16
B. Consultation with the wider regional Network

On 16 April 2009, draft 3 was forwarded on to the wider Network for consultation and
any feedback, was used to produce the final version of the benchmarking proforma.
Any wider Network proformas completed and returned to date have been added to
the file and will be included for regional benchmarking purposes as and when we
reach this stage.



C. Coordinating work with regional E&D Groups for national benchmarking

There is the potential for national benchmarking and target setting by pooling our
NW data with other regional E&D groups undertaking similar work. Aziza and Sam
are continuing to liaise with and coordinate this work with the other groups.

   1. North East region- Lead-John Prashar, Places for People
                         Gateshead Housing
                         Broadacres
                         Your Homes Newcastle
                         ISOS
                         Fabrick

   2. South region-         Lead-Elaine Curtis, Testway Housing
                            Testway Housing
                            Raglan Housing Association
                            Accent Peerless Ltd
                            Bracknell Forest Homes
                            Maidenhead & District Housing Association
                            Orbit Housing Group
                            Saxon Weald
                            Longhurst Group



D. Building a partnership with HouseMark

Maria Oliver, Benchmarking Manager at HouseMark attended a meeting of the NE
benchmarking group on 26 February 2009. This was to discuss whether it would be
possible for HouseMark to include some of the practitioner E&D KPI’s as part of the
suite of KPI’s offered to HouseMark members. Maria informed the meeting that
similar KPI’s to those in the draft E&D KPI proformas had been identified by the
HouseMark HR group.

More recently, since the E&D KPI’s have been piloted by the E&D groups, a further
discussion took place with HouseMark to agree a way forward. HouseMark have
specified that comprehensive descriptions for each E&D KPI will need to be
developed and approved by HouseMark. In addition HouseMark would need to
consult their membership to gain confirmation that these new E&D KPI’s would be of
use to the wider membership. Also it is anticipated that HouseMark members who
start to use the E&D KPI’s will want to attend any relevant regional KPI practitioner
meetings.

9d84ec9f-1a03-4a8f-b497-303720151959.docPage 5 of   16
A partnership approach to working with HouseMark would benefit all participating
members. Those who are members of HouseMark get to access this service via
HouseMark. However, non HouseMark members will have the benefit of
benchmarking with housing colleagues and having a full discussion of the results at
the region KPI benchmarking meetings.



The next step

All member organisations of the NW E&D Network are being asked to engage in the
benchmarking process. Participation is voluntary although it is hoped all
organisations will want to participate given the clear benefits. The more
organisations that participate, the more accurate and meaningful the benchmarking
data and the more likely we can achieve like for like comparisons.

All organisational performance data supplied on the proforma will be treated as
confidential and will be used for benchmarking purposes only.

Note that the proforma is not intended to be comprehensive. It might be considered
too long by some and too short by others and deemed to be excluding some KPI
areas. The proforma did start off much longer. But, the pilot indicated that we need
to start small and focus on areas that we are all most likely to collate data on already
so the task of completion is not onerous but manageable and is not viewed as ‘extra
work.’ Also, it is hoped this more simplified proforma will get maximum ‘buy in’ from
member organisations, enable like for like comparison. and, will make national
benchmarking more possible.




To contribute toward NW KPI benchmarking, please complete the proforma at
the end of the report or request an electronic version from:

Aziza.Kapadia@mosscare.org.uk




9d84ec9f-1a03-4a8f-b497-303720151959.docPage 6 of   16
Name of organisation:
Organisational profile:                                     Instruction 1 of 3-please select which two of the descriptions below best describes your organisation
A. Type of social housing body-select one per                                                Stock
line                                                      RSL             ALMO             Transfer            LA        Other-please state:
B. Size of organisation in units-select one per line    up to 500       501-1500         1501-3000       3001-5000       5001-10000         100001+


                                                       Can this be    Responsible      Performance      Performance     Performance      Benchmarked
                                                                                                                                                           Comments
Data source                       KPI                  evidenced?       team or         1 April 06-      1 April 07-     1 April 08-        target
                                                                                                                                                            optional
                                                        yes or no      postholder      31 March 07      31 March 08     31 March 09        09/10 tbc
                                                               Instruction 2 of 3-please complete all grey shaded areas below
                 Service delivery

                 % Resident profile completion

                 Data collation includes: (yes/no)
                 Age
internal data
source
                 Disability
                 Ethnic origin
                 Gender
                 Religion or belief
                 Sexual orientation

                 Lettings
                 % Age head of household
CORE lettings
log 4.1          18 to 24 years
                 25 to 31 years



         9d84ec9f-1a03-4a8f-b497-303720151959.docPage 7 of   16
                32 to 38 years
                39 to 45 years
                46 to 52 years
                53 to 59 years
                60 to 64 years
                65 to 69 years
                70 to 74 years
                75 to 79 years
                80 years and over
                Prefer not to say

                % Household members define
                as disabled
                Yes
                No

CORE lettings
                Prefer not to say
log 9
                % Household members with long term illness
                Yes
                No
                Prefer not to say

                % Household members wheelchair
CORE lettings
                users
log 10          Yes
                No



        9d84ec9f-1a03-4a8f-b497-303720151959.docPage 8 of   16
                 Prefer not to say


                 % Ethnic origin head of household
CORE lettings    BME (everyone but White British)
log 7
                 White British
                 Prefer not to say


                 % Gender head of household
CORE lettings    Male
log 4.2
                 Female
                 Prefer not to say


                 % Religion or belief head of household
                 Buddhist
                 Hindu
internal data    Jewish
source
                 Muslim
                 Sikh
                 Christian
                 Prefer not to say

                 % Sexual orientation head of
                 household
internal data    Lesbian/gay/bisexual
source
                 Heterosexual
                 Prefer not to say


         9d84ec9f-1a03-4a8f-b497-303720151959.docPage 9 of   16
                    Staffing and Employment

                    Total employees


                    % Age
                    16-24
                    25-44
                    45-64
                    65 and over
RSR Part P
paid staff and
governing body      % Disabled
or other internal
data source
                    % Ethnic origin
                    BME (everyone but White British)
                    White British


                    % Gender
                    Female
                    Male


                    % Religion or belief
                    Buddhist
internal data
source              Hindu
                    Jewish
                    Muslim


         9d84ec9f-1a03-4a8f-b497-303720151959.docPage 10 of   16
                    Sikh
                    Christian


                    % Sexual orientation
internal data
source              Lesbian/gay/bisexual
                    Heterosexual

                    Senior management (top 5% earners)


                    % Age
                    16-24
                    25-44
                    45-64
                    65 and over
RSR Part P
paid staff and
governing body
                    % Disabled
or other internal
data source
                    % Ethnic origin
                    BME (everyone but White British)
                    White British


                    % Gender
                    Female
                    Male




         9d84ec9f-1a03-4a8f-b497-303720151959.docPage 11 of   16
                    % Religion or belief
                    Buddhist
                    Hindu
internal data
source              Jewish
                    Muslim
                    Sikh
                    Christian


                    % Sexual orientation
internal data
source              Lesbian/gay/bisexual
                    Heterosexual

                    Governance


                    % Residents on the Board


                    % Age
                    16-24
RSR Part P
paid staff and      25-44
governing body      45-64
or other internal
data source         65 and over


                    % Disabled residents


                    % Gender



         9d84ec9f-1a03-4a8f-b497-303720151959.docPage 12 of   16
                  Female
                  Male


                  % Race
                  BME (everyone but White British)
                  White British


                  % Religion or belief
                  Buddhist
                  Hindu
internal data
source            Jewish
                  Muslim
                  Sikh
                  Christian


                  % Sexual orientation
internal data
source            Lesbian/gay/bisexual
                  Heterosexual

                  Access to information and services

                  Resident satisfaction
STATUS            % Residents satisfied with
survey or other
internal data
                  opportunities to take part in
source            management & decision making




         9d84ec9f-1a03-4a8f-b497-303720151959.docPage 13 of   16
        Satisfaction break down:
        % Age
        16-24
        25-44
        45-64
        65 and over


        % Disabled residents


        % Gender
        Female
        Male


        % Race
        BME (everyone but White British)
        White British


        % Religion or belief
        Buddhist
        Hindu
        Jewish
        Muslim
        Sikh
        Christian




9d84ec9f-1a03-4a8f-b497-303720151959.docPage 14 of   16
                  % Sexual orientation
                  Lesbian/gay/bisexual
                  Heterosexual

                  Harassment reported by residents (includes hate crime, domestic abuse and anti social behaviour)

                  Hate crime
                  Total number of cases reported


                  % Type of hate crime
internal data     Age
source            Disability
                  Gender
                  Race
                  Religion or belief
                  Sexual orientation


internal data     Domestic abuse reported by residents
source
                  Total number of cases reported


                  Management moves due to harassment
                  Total number of moves
CORE lettings
log 14 or other
internal data
                  % Breakdown reason for move
source
                  % Anti-social behaviour
                  % Domestic abuse


         9d84ec9f-1a03-4a8f-b497-303720151959.docPage 15 of   16
                  % Hate crime

                  Asset Management

STATUS
survey or other   Responsive repairs
internal data
                  % Residents satisfied with overall
source
                  repairs service

STATUS
survey or other   Adaptations
internal data
                  % Residents satisfied with adaptation
source
                  service
                               Instruction 3 of 3 - please return completed form with any comments by 31 May 2009 to Aziza.Kapadia@mosscare.org.uk




        9d84ec9f-1a03-4a8f-b497-303720151959.docPage 16 of   16

								
To top