ytd definition

Performance Report Performance 2nd Quarter 2007/08 (July – September 2007) 1 2 Contents PAGE Calculations & Definitions Executive Summary 01 Participation and Diversity 02 Customer Satisfaction 03 Customer Care and Service Delivery 04 Allocations and Lettings 05 Repairs 06 Rent Collection and Debt Recovery 07 Estate Management 08 Anti Social Behaviour 5 11 17 21 29 51 60 77 101 105 3 4 Calculations & Definitions This section explains in more detail how the results are calculated. Performance Report 2nd Quarter 2007/08 5 Definitions BV 66a: Rent Collection Definition: The amount of rent we collect as a proportion of the total debit. The total debit is the amount of rent we charge plus the amount of debt brought forward from the end of the previous year. This does not include empty properties. Rent Collected ------------------------------------------------------------------------------Debit (tenant properties only) + Rent Arrears brought forward X 100 Calculation: Example: £100m ---------------------------------£100m + £5m = £105m X 100 = 95.23% This is a cumulative calculation within the year showing the average year to date figure. BV66b Definition: Accounts over 7 weeks The average number of Tenancies with more than 7 weeks of (gross) rent arrears as a percentage of the average total number of Council Tenancies Average Number of tenants owing more than 7 weeks -----------------------------------------------------------------------Average Total number of tenancies 300 ---------- X 100 = 10% 3000 X 100 Calculation: Example: This is a cumulative calculation within the year showing the average year to date figure. BV66c Definition: Calculation: Cases with NISPs served The percentage of Tenants in arrears who have had Notices of Seeking Possession served. Number of tenants who have been served a NISP during the financial year ------------------------------------------------------------ X 100 Number of Tenants in arrears. 30 ---------- X 100 = 10% 300 Example: This is a cumulative calculation within the year. 6 BV66d Definition: Calculation: Evictions The percentage of Tenants evicted as result of rent arrears Number of tenants evicted as result of rent arrears --------------------------------------------------------------------All tenants 300 ---------- X 100 = 10% 3000 X 100 Example: This is a cumulative calculation within the year LKI HMA1 : Rent Arrears (formerly BV66b) Definition: Total debt as a percentage of the Rent Roll. The Rent Roll is the total amount of rent that we could collect on all our properties. It includes empty homes. Current + County Court Judgements ---------------------------------------------------Debit (including empty properties) X 100 Calculation: Example: £300K ---------- X 100 = 1.5% £20m This is not a cumulative calculation. It shows the actual figure at a moment in time. BVPI 212Definition: Lettable Turnaround Time (formerly HMA2) The average length of time in days from Tenancy Termination to the start of the next Tenancy. This does not include empty properties which require „Major Works‟ and cannot be let until these are completed, for example removal of asbestos. This is a cumulative calculation within the year. Figures from the previous year are not brought forward LKI-HMA3: Rent Loss (formerly BV69) Definition: The rent that would be due from empty properties if they were tenanted as a percentage of the Rent Roll. The Average Weekly Rent (AWR) is £49.41. Voids X Average Weekly Rent (AWR) = Cumulative Rent Loss ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Debit (including empty properties) X 100 Calculation: Example: 1605 x £49.51 = £79,463.55 -------------------------------------£5m X 100 = 1.59% 7 This is a cumulative calculation within the year. Figures from the previous year are not brought forward LKI-HMA6: Definition: Voids The percentage of our empty properties as a proportion of the total stock. This is not a cumulative calculation. It shows the actual figure at a moment in time LKI-HMA4: Non Urgent Repairs Completed within Government Time scales (formerly BV73) Definition: The measure is taken from the customer reporting the repair / inspection through to its completion. This is not a cumulative calculation LKI-HMA7: % of Urgent Repairs Completed (formerly BV72) Definition: The time taken from the date an urgent order is raised to the date of actual completion of the work. Urgent orders include Emergency and Priority orders This is a monthly figure HMA13: Repairs by Appointment (formerly BV185) Definition: Percentage of repairs for which we have made and kept an appointment. Appointments which we attend but the customer does not are classed as kept. This is not a cumulative calculation HMA14: Percentage of repairs which were Emergency or Urgent Definition: Percentage of repairs which were emergency or urgent as a percentage of all repairs This is a cumulative calculation within the year BV184a: Proportion of Homes Non Decent Definition: The percentage of properties which do not meet the Decency Standard It shows the actual figure at a moment in time 8 BV184b: Percentage Change in Decent Homes Definition: Percentage change in Decent Homes during the current financial year It shows the actual figure at a moment in time Comparing Our Performance 1. Variance The Variance shows how much our current performance “varies” from our target. It is simply the amount of difference between our performance and the target, as a percentage of the target. Variance is described as “favourable” if we are performing above target and “adverse” if we are below. Calculation: Panel Target - Panel Current --------------------------------------Panel Target X 100 Example: 3.10% - 3.04% ----------------------- X 100 = 1.93% 3.10% Calculating variance in this way gives an accurate picture of performance against target, and also helps compare performance across different indicators. 2. Quartiles The quartile figure shows how we compare against other similar local authorities and ALMOs. We compare against other “Metropolitan Authorities”. If our performance is “Top Quartile” it means our performance is within the figures achieved by the best 25% of authorities in 2004/5. Second quartile means our performance is within the figures achieved by the best 50% and so on. Quartiles are comparative, so if everybody improves their performance, the figure for Top Quartile will be higher. If everyone‟s performance worsens, the figure for Top Quartile will be lower. 9 10 Executive Summary A full summary of all performance against targets and Top Quartiles Performance Report Year End 2006/07 11 12 Summary Tenant Involvement and Diversity Indicator Title of Indicator 06/07 Result 55.67% 07/08 Target 84.75% 07/08 Current 55% Variance Traffic Light  Top Quartile - BV75a  BV75b  BV75c  Overall Satisfaction with Opportunities for Involvement (All Tenants) 35.1% A Overall Satisfaction with Opportunities for Involvement (ME Tenants) 59% 79.5% 56.1% 29.4% A  - Overall Satisfaction with Opportunities for Involvement (Non ME Tenants) 57% 90% 53.9% 40.1% A  LKI  LKI  LKI  Number of Registered and Non Registered Groups N/A No target set No target set No target set 63 N/A - - % of ENEHL properties covered by Registered and Non Registered Groups N/A 61% N/A - - % of BME communities within ENEHL represented by a group N/A 95% - - - Customer Satisfaction Surveys this quarter Indicator    Title of Indicator Spring Gardens Sheltered Housing Survey Closed Complaints Satisfaction Satisfaction with Local Lettings Policies 06/07 Result N/A N/A N/A 07/08 Target No target set No target set No target set 07/08 Current 90% 50% 82% Variance Traffic Light    -  = we aim to get the highest possible figure. We want performance to be above the target.  = we aim to get the lowest possible figure. We want performance to be below the target. = Above target = Below target by less than 6% = Below target by more than 6% = No target currently set / No figures available A = Adverse F = Favourable 13 Customer Care and Service Delivery Indicator Title of Indicator 06/07 Result 71.67% 07/08 Target 07/08 Current 74.6% Variance Traffic Light   Top Quartile - BV74a  LPI  LPI  Tenant Satisfaction with the overall service - Complaints resolved within 15 working days No Data 90% 59% 34.4% A - Member Correspondence replied to in 10 working days No Data 90% 59.9% 33.4% A  - Allocations & Lettings Indicator Title of Indicator 06/07 Result 07/08 Year End Target 30 days 07/08 2 Quarter Target nd 07/08 Current Variance Traffic Light Upper Threshold BV212  CPA High Risk Average relet times for local authority dwellings let in the current financial year 35.3 days 35.6 days 30.75 days 13.6% F  26.7 days or less 2.6% LKI-HMA3  LKI-HMA6  Percentage of rent lost through local authority dwellings becoming vacant 1.53% 1.4% 1.47% 1.22% 17% F  Proportion of properties currently untenanted (%) 1.38% 1.3% 1.34% 1.36% 1.49% A  -  = we aim to get the highest possible figure. We want performance to be above the target.  = we aim to get the lowest possible figure. We want performance to be below the target. = Above target = Below target by less than 6% = Below target by more than 6% = No target currently set / No figures available A = Adverse F = Favourable 14 Repairs Indicator Title of Indicator 06/07 Result 07/08 Year End Target 10.5 days 97.5% 07/08 2 Quarter Target nd 07/08 Current Variance Traffic Light Upper Threshold LKI-HMA4 (CPA)  LKI-HMA7 (CPA)  HMA13  HMA14  The average time taken to complete non-urgent responsive repairs 17.91 days 96.52% 14.21 days 97.01% 10.65 days 98.46% 25.1% F  11 days The percentage of urgent repairs completed within Government time limits % Responsive appointments made and kept 1.49% F  97% 96% 96% 96% 97.13% 1.18% F   - % of the total repair orders raised that were Emergency or Urgent 29.31% 27% 28.16% nd 29.12% 3.41% A - Improvements and Regeneration Indicator Title of Indicator 06/07 Result 07/08 Year End Target 24% 07/08 2 Quarter Target 07/08 Current Variance Traffic Light Upper Threshold BV184a (CPA)  BV184b (CPA)  BV63 (CPA)  NR4 Proportion of homes non-decent (%) 34.02% 29.01% 27.72% 4.45% F  21% Change in Decent Homes (%) Energy Efficiency – Average SAP rating 13.18% 29.46% 7.24% 4.91% 32.2% A   23.80% No Data 67.2 66.35 73.2 10.3% F 65 Floor decency target 65.98% 76% 70.99% 72.28% 1.82% F  -  = we aim to get the highest possible figure. We want performance to be above the target.  = we aim to get the lowest possible figure. We want performance to be below the target. = Above target = Below target by less than 6% = Below target by more than 6% = No target currently set / No figures available A = Adverse F = Favourable 15 Rent Collection & Debt Recovery Indicator Title of Indicator 06/07 Result 07/08 Year End Target 97.6% 07/08 2 Quarter Target nd 07/08 Current Variance (Based nd on 2 Qtr Target) Traffic Light Upper Threshold BV66a  CPA High Risk Local authority rent collection and arrears: proportion of rent collected 96.6% 97.28% 96.46% 1.41% A  98.2% LKI HMA1  BV66b  BV66c  BV66d   Rent arrears of current tenants as a proportion of the authority‟s rent roll 3.05% 2.75% 2.9% 3.22% 11% A     2.6% % tenants with more than 7 weeks rent arrears. 6.65% 6.15% 6.4% 6.18% 3.44% F - % of tenants in arrears who have had NISPS served 22.74% 27% 13.5% 8% 40.7% F - Tenants evicted as a result of rent arrears 0.27% 0.225% 0.125% 0.1% 20% F  - Average arrears per property in £ £75.33 £71.14 £73.24 £83.65 14.2% A  - Anti Social Behaviour (2nd Quarter Figures) Indicator New ASB cases ASB cases closed by local office Cases referred to ASBU Hate Crime incidents reported Title of Indicator 2 nd Quarter 138 209 34 23  = we aim to get the highest possible figure. We want performance to be above the target.  = we aim to get the lowest possible figure. We want performance to be below the target. = Above target = Below target by less than 6% = Below target by more than 6% = No target currently set / No figures available A = Adverse F = Favourable 16 01 Participation & Diversity Performance Report 2nd Quarter 2007/08 17 Quarter 2 Partnership Team activity Area Panels The Area Panels are now up and running and beginning to meet every month. Three of the four panels are carrying a vacancy however this will be addressed over the coming weeks. The panels have agreed Terms of Reference and are beginning to identify and develop their priorities. These include;      Repairs Tenant Involvement Batched work Youth work Tenancy Management The panels are very much in the developmental stage, getting used to their role and understanding what they can get involved with and influence. The Head of Repairs and Property Maintenance attended a meeting of the Inner East Area Panel to talk about repairs etc. The panel found this very useful. The Terms of Reference are very broad and it will take a couple of years for the panel to become fully acquainted with them and develop a plan to be able to implement them. The Panels have devolved part of their revenue budget back to the Partnership Development Officers to ensure that where resident groups identify communal repairs or improvements there will not be a delay in ordering the works by waiting for the next meeting of the panels. Estate Investment Bids (EIBs) The panels are considering or have approved over 22 Estate Investment Bids including: Harehills - Nowell Mount Richmond Hill - Spring Close Burmontofts – Shakespeares Osmondthorpe - Rookwood Vale Scott Hall - Estate wide Potternewton - Potternewton Crescent Beckhill - Stainbecks Fieldhouses - Fieldhouse Drive Scott Hall – Buslingthorpes Miles Hill - Potternewton Lane Brackenwood - Lidgett Lane King Alfreds – Nr Cardinal Heenan West Parks - Roman Avenue Brackenwood - Brackenwood Drive Gledhow - Gledhow Towers Leafields - Leafield Towers Brackenwood - Lincombe Drive Fir Tree - Fir Tree Vale Wetherby Durrant Close Bramham - Main St Boggart Hill – Shop parade Parkway Towers - Seacroft Seacroft Gate – Seacroft Domestic Violence – Theatre group Drama Queens – Dispersal Order - Seacroft 18 The estimated total spend for these schemes is £120K and includes match funding of £70K. The majority of which has come from Safer Stronger Communities Fund (SSCF) and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) but also includes funding from Area Management Team (AMT) Update on Q1 Estate Investment Bids;  Durrant Close – Fencing Scheme – Consultation completed, approved Oct 07 expected completion in Q3  Queenshill Estate – Additional Litter Bins – will be completed as part of an Estate Walkabout (revenue) in Q3  Fir Tree Vale Garage Site –Approved October 07, expected completion in Q3  Potternewton Lane – Fencing Scheme – Still in consultation  Potternewton Crescent (Open Space) – Creation of Community Garden / Environmental protection – Approved awaiting start date  Potternewton Crescent / Scott Wood Lane – Environmental work – expected completion 15/11  Scott Hall Estate – Provision of security gates - still awaiting consultation. Partnership Operations The Partnership Development Officers are developing partnerships across the area including the “Improving Chapeltown” group (IMPaCT) and the Beckhills Implementation Group (BIG) in the Inner North East. The Moor Allerton Partnership (MAP) in the Outer North East and the Together Partnership in Gipton/Richmond Hill as well as the tasking meetings across the whole area. As the Area Panels priorities emerge, the Partnership Development Officers will identify and develop further partnerships. Young People East North East Homes Leeds has signed up to the Yorkshire Dreamscheme project, which is a reward and recognition scheme for young people aimed at 11-18 years old. Effectively the scheme is based on good citizenship and rewards youngsters based on the work they do with their community. A member of the team is a trustee of Yorkshire Dreamscheme alongside West North West Homes, Connect Housing, Leeds Tenants Federation and other local housing providers. 19 There is a Dreamscheme project currently in development in Osmondthorpe with ENEHL and Connect. This is a gardening scheme to clear and maintain a garden to 1 Neville Square, a communal building for the residents of Osmondthorpe. East North East Homes Leeds is also working with Connect on another Dreamscheme in Seacroft where local young people are working on an empty property with East North East Homes Leeds Building Services staff. Older Residents The over 50s club around the Moortown area continues to thrive and now requires less support from East North East Homes Leeds staff. Future Tasks Service Plans have been developed for the Partnership Development Officers and the Community Development Officers this sets out the work of the team for the remainder of the financial year and includes         Increasing the number of residents groups Increasing the % of residents represented by a group Developing the Area Panels Spending the panels budget Developing consultation methods Improving customer satisfaction Improving implementation of Estate Investment Bids Providing training for residents 20 02 Customer Satisfaction This section gives information about customer surveys and their outcomes Performance Report 2nd Quarter 2007/08 21 Satisfaction with 3 service areas has been collated and analysed in the second quarter Spring Garden Close Sheltered Housing Survey Response: 32 Sent and 10 Received. Response rate – 31.3% Overall Satisfaction Level with Sheltered Warden Service: 90% A survey was sent to the residents of Spring Garden Close to gather their satisfaction levels with various aspects of living in Sheltered Housing Overall the tenants‟ view of living in Sheltered Housing was positive with 30% of respondents stating it was better than they thought it would be and 70% stating it was the same. 100% feel Sheltered Housing met their expectations 100% feel that living in Sheltered Housing helps lead an independent life? Satisfaction levels with the Sheltered Housing Wardens were generally very high with 90% stating that they used the Sheltered Housing Warden Service and 90% thinking that they saw their Housing Warden about the right amount. 88.9% of respondents stated that it was easy to contact the warden when they needed them. The other 11.1% don‟t use the warden service 80% took part in the organised Social activities with 50% participating every week and 10% every day. 77.8% are satisfied with the type of organised social activities available within the Spring Gardens Close Sheltered Housing Scheme. 50% would like more organised social activities one suggestion was more bingo. 88.9% think that in-door communal areas are kept clean and tidy, with the other 11.1% not having a communal area. 60% think that out-door communal gardens/walkways are well maintained and 50% would like easier access to communal areas All of the suggestions put forward on how to improve the communal areas related to improving the out-door areas. Tenants wanted more seating and more weeding as well as better clearing up of grass cuttings. 40% of respondents stated that they wore the Emergency Response System Pendant 22 20% of respondents had used the Emergency Response System in the last three months and 75% of respondents stated they were satisfied with the response; this is slightly higher than the figure from the previous survey. 60% also stated that their call to the Emergency Response Team had been answered in one minute. Is there anything that might make you feel safer in your home?  Bars on my bathroom windows  Would be better if gate (adjoining fencing) was locked again – now broken and left open leaving residents vulnerable  As said repeated requests for security railing  Fencing replacing, been none for 12 months  There is a lot of gangs of youth always in and out of the complex 70% of respondents reported that they felt safe in their home and slightly more, 80%, of respondents stated they felt safe within their Sheltered Housing Complex. Safety in both the Sheltered Housing Complex and the home was the area where tenants left the most comments. Recommendations: 50% take part in social activities each week and 10% take part every day. Therefore more investigation into what type of social activities the residents would like may be beneficial to encourage take-up. Satisfaction levels for the out-door communal areas was significantly lower than for the in-door communal areas. Therefore investigation into why some tenants are dissatisfied with the out-door communal areas and how they may be improved would increase satisfaction. Publicity to raise awareness of the benefits of the pendant service may help improve the number of tenants taking advantage of this service. Safety was an area where tenants left the most comments, therefore as security is a main concern of residents some investigation into concerns raised and improvement to existing security measures may help to increase satisfaction levels in this area. 23 Closed Complaints Satisfaction Response rate: 137 surveys sent, 11 returned = Response Rate - 8% Closed Complaints Satisfaction Level: 50% Very satisfied or fairly satisfied with the way in which the complaint was dealt with A survey was sent to tenants who had registered a complaint which had been investigated responded to and closed by East North East Homes Leeds to gather the tenant‟s satisfaction levels with the process. Unfortunately the response rate at just 11 returns was very low. Of those who complained in writing only 40% confirmed acknowledgement of their complaint within the 3 day target response time. 45.5% reported their complaint by telephone, 27.3% verbally (face to face), 18.2% in writing and 9.1% by email. 45.5% found reporting their complaint easy, with 27.3% saying it was neither easy nor difficult to report, with a further 27.3% stating it was very difficult to report. Reasons given for finding it difficult to report their complaint was not being given the telephone number to complain until a further visit to the office although this is displayed on notice boards outside each office. Also a lack of replies when complaining. 60% received a response or a holding letter explaining the reason for the delay within 15 working days 66.7% of those who answered the question relating to what stage the complaint was resolved said 66.7% at the first stage and 33.3% resolved at stage 2. 70% felt the information received was clear and easy to understand. 50% were very or fairly satisfied with the way their complaint was dealt with 12.5% having no opinion and 37.5% being very dissatisfied. The comments of those who were dissatisfied including still waiting for the repair to be carried out and that compensation had not been paid for damage caused. Of those who were dissatisfied with the way the complaint was dealt with it was asked if it had been pursued further. 50% said they had, 25% said no because they didn‟t have trust in the ENEHL complaint procedure and 25% said that change would not happen as a result of the complaint made. 50% found the staff who dealt with the complaint helpful. 33% found that staff were always fair with the way the complaint was dealt and 50% usually found staff dealing with the complaint helpful. 37.5% said that staff did what was promised, with a further 25% saying that usually staff did as promised. 24 Recommendations: Work towards meeting service standards set This may be a misunderstanding whether 3 days is from the customer sending the letter or 3 days from when it is received by post. The service standards need to be amended to make sure they are clear in this respect. Make the complaints process easier for tenants Some investigation is needed into whether it can be made easier for those tenants who wish to complaint to do so could improve the complaints process at ENEHL. The complaints process to be reviewed with a view to make easier and promotion of the complaints helpline to take place. Clearer Communication to tenants when closing complaints This survey was sent only to tenants who have had complaints closed, however many of those who returned surveys indicated this was not the case. When asked at what stage their complaint was resolved many respondents did not answer the question and indicated that they believed their complaint had not been resolved or was not closed. Therefore better communication with tenants about how their complaint has been resolved and closed may help improve satisfaction levels. Strive to improve Satisfaction Levels with the way in which the complaints are dealt with Currently only 50% of respondents stated they were satisfied with the way in which the complaint was dealt with in relation to the service provided. This is quite a low satisfaction level. Some of the respondents advised they were still waiting for work to be carried out. Better communication during the process and keeping customers informed would assist in improving satisfaction. 25 Satisfaction with Local Lettings Policies Response rate: 3078 surveys sent, 1031 returned = Response Rate - 33% 82% satisfaction with Local Lettings Policies Local Lettings Policies are drafted in consultation with residents and partner agencies. They affect small areas of property types or blocks of flats. Policies in place reflect local connection, a „preference‟ to be given to applicants above a certain age and for Multi Storey blocks restrictions on families with full time access to children or children below a certain age. The policies enable a „preference‟ to be given to applicants meeting the criteria when letting properties within an area or block to which the policies apply. However they are a „preference‟ only and if applicants within the age guide do not apply for the property, then it must be let to the applicant nearest to the age criteria. The policies have to be reviewed annually and the response reported to Leeds City Council as the Strategic Landlord. The healthy return of 33% to this satisfaction and review of the policies reflects the strength of support for the policies. Findings  82% of respondents like the current Local Lettings Policy for their area  39% said it has improved the community spirit in their area  58% said it has reduced noise form other people  58% feel safer as a result of the Local Letting Policy  31% thinks that there is more neighbour contact  43% think that it has reduced the crime. Examples of positive comments made by respondents about the LLP include:      Feel cared for and the flats are clean People are more responsible at age 35 plus We have only been in the flats 8 months but the feeling of security is very good The situation has improved tremendously. Please keep the over 40s policy because the improvement is a direct result of the LLP I have been in my flat almost 6 years and since being here I have felt really safe There is a much better atmosphere now 73% of the respondents don‟t think that their Local Letting Policy needs changing. However of the 26% that do think it should be changed they chose the following options of how they would like it changed which in the main reflect increasing restrictions. 26        4% thought that the age limit should be removed 25% said increase it by 5 years 29% thought that it should be increased by 10 years 23% thought it should be increased by 15 years 3% thought it should be decreased by 5 years 2% said decrease it by 10 years and 1% said it should be decreased by 15 years. 16% wanted a requirement for disability to be introduced and 9% thought that the requirement for families with children over 12 years should be introduced. 34 % of the people who think the policy should be changed said it would change their life completely and 7% said it would only change their life a little bit. A number of negative comments were made regarding the local letting policy, below is a summary of these answers       Age limit Local Lettings Policy not kept to It has caused there to be more noise Occasional vandalism There has to be diversity and equality, just because a person is under 40 does not mean they are bad tenants Pet dogs in the flats Some of the answers given for other reasons why it has improved the area slightly conflict with the above depending upon which are and the related policy:      Reduced drug users Reduced vandalism and Anti-Social Behaviour Not as much noise Cleaner as older tenants take more pride in where they live Feel safer Friendlier and better place to live Other suggestions made to change the policy were: I have no problem with children living in flats. Every child is different, not all children make noise, and some children are more disciplined than others. I feel tenants should be responsible for the community they live in, most tenants are respectable and a few don‟t care. More involvement of tenants in the block Need better security, cleaning, rubbish is a huge problem Stop residents from having young people living with them in one bedroom flats, as they are causing noise and disruption all hours of day and night. Broken sleep and threats etc.    27 Recommendations A number of issues raised are not directly related to the Lettings policy but are standard tenancy related matters. It is clear there is some misunderstanding regarding what the policies are, how they work and the potential benefits. Therefore an article to be produced for the Tenants Newsletter explaining the „preference‟ only factor and how this works in practice would be beneficial. Also working with residents to produce a guide to living in high Rise Flats for issue at sign up. 28 03 Customer Care & Service Delivery This section gives information about our Contact Centre’s service delivery Performance Report 2nd Quarter 2007/08 Call volumes 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 April May June July Aug 4710 4701 4693 4380 5463 5585 5233 5076 5967 5409 6538 5014 Sept of f ered enehl of f ered CCC Please note some figures may be absent for the corporate contact centre as they have not yet been provided. As reported in the first quarter, the call volumes to each contact centre are very similar. This was of concern as the East North East Homes given the disparity in the number of users for each line. In house team 6000 customers compared the Corporate Contact Centre which serves 14000. The benchmarking exercise currently being undertaken has highlighted that the number of calls the corporate contact centre are reporting may be incorrect. They predict that 3rd quarter reporting should produce a very different picture. 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 April May June July answered CCC Aug 4437 4264 4156 4116 5686 4891 4855 5023 4585 4707 6113 4286 Sept answered enehl 96 94 92 90 94 94 91 94 90 90 95 94 88 89 % 88 86 84 82 80 April May June July 87 85 Aug Sept handling enehl handling CCC Performance at the ENEHL Contact Centre has declined in the 2 nd quarter due to annual leave, sickness and vacancy rates. Staff rallied round to take the calls but due to their inexperience calls were taking longer to service which impacted on the number of calls we could deal with. Recruitment took place in September to ease the vacancy factor. 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 April May Abandoned enehl June July 273 267 543 428 343 608 544 489 702 728 425 281 Aug Sept Abandoned CCC Due to the problems detailed in this report the abandoned calls rose significantly in August and September. 50 45 40 35 30 32 26 22 18 20 28 40 40 40 44 35 29 19 29 29 21 29 24 % 25 20 15 10 5 0 April May June July Month Aug Sept Customer chase ups %enehl per qual code Customer chase ups %enehl per discoverer Customer chase ups %CCC KEY Customer Chase Ups where telephone operator adds a manual code to the call Customer Chase Ups data reported from the Siebel system Customer Chase Ups by Corporate Contact Centre 120 100 80 60 39 40 20 0 April May June July Aug Sept 27 23 22 0 0 44 51 98 83 95 86 Ave length of time in the queue in seconds enehl Ave length of time in the queue in seconds CCC This is how long it takes for a customer to speak to a staff member and not a „machine‟. The reporting of this is currently being investigated by the telephony agents „Affiniti‟ as figures have not been available in the correct format for August and September for East North East Homes. It is noticeable that the corporate contact centre have reduce their length of time in the queue figure by 50% due to bringing in extra staff over the bank holiday period to deal with the influx of calls which arrive directly after the holiday. It would appear that the current benchmarking exercise has led to better resource and improved services for our customers utilising the Corporate Contact centre. 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 79 67 77 74 77 70 76 74 76 73 73 65 April May June July Aug Sept FPOC % enehl FPOC % ccc FPOC = First Point of Contact Statistical information on calls services resolved at first point of contact (FPOC) are reported by a shared report as part of our benchmarking exercises. East North East Homes are aiming for a minimum of 80% First point of contact and are improving on this. Once Siebel is rolled out, more information should be available directly to our contact centre staff and we should see this improve even more. 03 Complaints, Compliments & Members Enquiries This section gives information about compliments received, our response to complaints from tenants and members of the public and our response to Councillor and MP enquiries Performance Report 2nd Quarter 2007/08 Complaints and Compliments Stage 1 complaints Number of Stage 1 complaints received each month Stage 1 complaints received and number acknowledged in 3 working days 100 80 80 51 58 81 59 59 Number 60 40 20 0 April May June Month July Aug Sept Complaints received Complaints ack in 3 w d KEY:Complaints Received Complaints Acknowledged in 3 working days A new reporting system has been implemented to monitor our performance on complaints. On analyzing these reports it has become evident that there are „gaps‟ on information transferred from Siebel to the new performance reporting system which is impacting on acknowledgement performance as reported. Acknowledgement can be verbal or written depending on the customer request, however, the new reporting system does not pick recording of verbal acknowledgement and therefore reports a failure. Work arounds are planned to enable more accurate performance reporting for the next quarter and until such time as the system can be amended. Stage 1 complaints % of complaints responded to within 15 working days % of Stage 1 Complaints answered in < 15 wd 100 80 66 43 51 74 63 53 60 40 20 0 April May June Month % of stage 1 complaints answered in < 15 wd July Aug Sept There has been a decline in performance on numbers responded to within timescales over the traditional holiday period. It is expected this will pick up again over the next quarter. However, the importance of responding to complaints within target timescales has been emphasised supported by monthly reminders of complaints approaching due response times. Holding responses sent % of Holding responses sent to Stage 1 complaints not responded to within 15 working days % % of Holding letters sent in within 15 working days 100 80 60 40 20 0 April 64 50 33 5 May June Month % of holding letters sent in within 15 working days 14 % July Aug Sept If a full response to a complaint within 15 working days is not possible, a holding letter is sent to the customer explaining that we need more time. By making contact in this way we are, in effect, responding to the customer within our time scales. Of the 22 complaints not responded to within 15 days, 14 were sent holding letters explaining the situation. Therefore 86% of all the complaints for August did receive some response within 15 working days. Stage 1 complaints % of complaints responded to within 15 working days – by service area 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Constructi Estate & Property Regenera Housing Customer Partnersh on Support Services tion Services Services ips Services Services 100 70 55 53 43 100 100 % Responded to within 15 working days The table above gives a clearer picture of the number of complaints for each service area and the need for improvement in areas such as Regeneration Housing Services. Stage 2 complaints Number of Stage 2 complaints received each month Stage 2 complaints received and acknowledged in 3 working days 10 8 9 7 5 3 Number 6 4 2 0 0 April May June Month Received Acknowledged July 0 Aug Sept There were no Stage 2 complaints received in July or August but there was an influx of Stage 2 complaints in September. Under ENEHL all stage 1 complaints are issued to Investigating Officers responsible for investigation and response. Random quality checks to ensure that the response letters reach a required standard are to be implemented in the third quarter by the Customer Relations Team. Ombudsman enquiries Number of Ombudsman Enquiries received each month Ombudsman complaints received in 2007 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 April May June Month July Aug Sep 1 1 2 1 1 3 3 new cases were received in July. One case referred to the condition of properties in the clearance areas and one to a long standing Anti-Social Behaviour case. The third final case related to modernisation/ regeneration work - this case did go through the ENEHL complaints procedure before reaching the Ombudsman. On this occasion the Ombudsman found the customer had not suffered any injustice and the case was closed as 'Ombudsman‟s Discretion'. This is a good result as it proves that our investigations at all stages of the complaints process were thorough and correct 1 new case was reported in August. This case related to an ongoing Stage 2 complaint. Although we were well on with our enquiries and had nearly resolved the complaint the Ombudsman asked that we continue with the case and expressed their interest in the case. The complaint was resolved within a month as „local settlement‟. However the settlement included a goodwill gesture of £500 for the delay in carrying out the initial repairs and a further £515 for new carpet / lino. The 1 case received in September was investigated by the Ombudsman by conducting telephone interviews with members of ENEHL staff. Following the telephone calls they felt there was no complaint for the ALMO to answer and the case was closed at the Ombudsman‟s Discretion. Number Compliments Number of compliments received each month Number of compliments received 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 13 10 6 3 Number 5 5 April May June Month July Aug Sept Number of compliments received There was a drive on the reporting of compliments at the joint SMT / AMT meeting in July. This resulted in an increase in the number reported and this continued in to August. September was quite disappointing with only three compliments being reported but we have asked that managers continue to encourage staff to report positive comments and compliments to the Customer Relations Team so they can be recorded. Service improvements and additional information The new reporting system „Discoverer‟ used to draw off the figures for complaints received, acknowledged, holding letters sent and responded to means it is extremely important that any action taken is recorded on Siebel – in particular the updating of holding letters, reply letters. If you do not change the Response sent from „Awaiting‟ to „Done‟ then the case will be showing as out-standing. Of all the complaints in August 54% relate to repairs. This includes responsive repairs, complaints relating to contractor performance and repairs carried out through home improvements / programme works. Overall, with the exception of the Property Services, there is a fair distribution of complaints through the company and Investigating Officers are responsible for answering around two or three complaints each month. Within Property Services, however, the two main Investigating Officers are responsible for investigating and responding to at least 37% of all the complaints each month, on average two to three complaints per week. The Performance & Improvement team are holding regular meetings with contractors to manage performance and improve satisfaction. Meetings too are soon to be held with the surveying and regeneration/improvements sections. Members Enquiries Feedback Report Members Enquiries Number of enquiries received and answered within 10 working days 500 400 300 200 100 0 April May June Recd in mth 283 167 357 275 322 445 372 236 152 238 159 219 July Ans in 10 wd Aug Sept Members Enquiries % of enquiries responded to within 10 working days 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 April May June July Aug Sept 59 47 53 77 67 58.8 . Members Enquiries Total number of enquiries responded to 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 April May June 298 368 308 396 307 321 July Aug Sept If we were to exclude the most active members from our calculations we would be hitting our performance target of 80% of responses in 10 working days. The actual number of responses remains high but the volume still continues to be a problem. The new process for prioritising the majority member enquiries seems to be working. We have had no recent complaints from members that their responses have been late or indeed that they have not received one. A growth bid has been submitted to provide an additional resource to the members side of the Customer relations team by an extra 3 days of a Full Time Equivalent. If this is successful, this should make the necessary impact. Recruitment would not be completed until November as the post has to be approved at HR sub committee in October. It is felt that the restructure and staff moves may have impacted on obtaining information to respond within timescales. It is hoped that in the 3rd quarter the statistics will reflect an improvement to enable the team to get full and comprehensive answers to members within timescale. Should quarter 3 not reflect the required improvements and it is felt that this is mainly due to the volumes from certain members, consideration may be given to this being taken to the Standards committee. Number of enquiries per Cllr/MP in July 07 Cllr Bentley Cllr Richard Lewis Cllr Peter Gruen Cllr Jackie Langdale Cllr Gerald Wilkinson Cllr Ewen Cllr Alan Lamb Cllr Sharon Hamilton Cllr Peter Harrand Cllr Paul Wadsworth Cllr Mo Rafique Cllr Jane Dowson Cllr Arif Hussain Colin Burgon MP Fabian Hamilton MP Cllr Veronica Morgan Hilary Benn MP George Mudie MP Cllr Roger Harrington Cllr Richard Brett Cllr Mike Lyons Cllr Mark Harris Cllr Graham Hyde Cllr David Hollingsworth Cllr Brian Selby Cllr Andrew Carter Cllr Allan Taylor 0 1 11 20 40 60 80 Number 100 120 140 160 3 15 2 138 6 12 19 2 148 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 3 1 5 3 3 3 1 6 9 Number of enquiries per member in August Yvette Cooper MP Gerry Sutcliffe MP Cllr Sue Bentley Cllr Valerie Kendal Cllr Peter Harrand Cllr Matthew Lobley Cllr Mohammed Rafique Colin Burgon MP Fabian Hamilton MP Cllr Vonnie Morgan Hilary Benn MP George Mudie MP Cllr Roger Harrington Cllr Richard Brett Cllr Ralph Pryke Cllr Mike Lyons Cllr Mark Harris Cllr Sharon Hamilton Cllr Graham Hyde Cllr Jane Dowson Cllr David Hollingsworth Cllr Brian Selby Cllr Arif Hussain Cllr Allan Taylor Cllr Alan Lamb 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 8 2 3 13 7 16 1 4 2 8 125 2 2 12 4 14 2 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Number of enquiries per member in September Cllr Jackie Langdale Cllr Gerald Wilkinson Cllr Paul Wadsworth Colin Burgon MP 2 1 1 1 Greg Mulholland Fabian Hamilton MP Cllr Vonnie Morgan 1 3 3 John Battle MP 1 George Mudie MP Cllr Roger Harrington Cllr Richard Brett 97 6 7 Cllr Mike Lyons 5 Cllr Mark Harris Cllr Sharon Hamilton Cllr Graham Hyde 1 5 182 Cllr Jane Dowson Cllr David Hollingsworth Cllr Brian Selby 4 7 15 Cllr Arif Hussain 3 Cllr Allan Taylor 5 Cllr Alan Lamb 0 1 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Number 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 94 Applications & Allocations 138 6 Allocations Clearance 7 27 ASB Applications & Allocations Allocations Clearance 11 Customer care & ASB 0 1 19 Estate Management 12 Fencing Customer care & Estate Management Fencing Other Regeneration Rent collection & Repairs 12 19 13 3 34 10 0 5 Other 8 Regeneration 5 Rent collection & 3 Types of Members enquiries received in Aug Types of members enquiries received in July Repairs 43 4 Support Services 1 Tenant Involvement Support Services Tenant Involvement 100 168 150 200 50 4 13 1 30 17 18 12 2 66 20 0 Applications & Allocations Allocations Clearance ASB Customer care & Service Estate Management Fencing Other Regeneration Rent collection & debt recovery Repairs Support Services Tenant Involvement Types of members enquiries received in September 04 Allocations & Lettings This section gives information on our management of empty properties and how quickly we let them 51 BV212 - (CPA) High Risk - Average Relet Time The average length of time our properties are empty between one tenant leaving and the next tenant moving in Year End Target: 30 days Currently: 30.75 days Variance: 2.5% Adverse nd 2 Quarter Target: 35.6 days Currently: 30.75 days Variance: 13.6% Favourable 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 July August September Top Quartile = 41 days and below 2nd Quartile = 41- 52 days 3 Quartile = 52- 63 days CPA Upper 26.7 days CPA Lower 52 days rd Relet Times by Office Year To Date Office ENEHL Total Office ENEHL Total July 29.14 days July 28.29 days August 22.78 days August 27.5 days September 30.75 days September 32.24 days YTD Quartile Top Monthly Performance of Relet Times The September increase has been impacted by the Leeds City Council Dispersed Hostel Accommodation coming back into use. This is to be factored out at a later date and will result in improved performance for ENEHL but will need to be included for the City‟s overall performance. Annual Direction of Travel Average Relet Time 2nd Quarter 06/07 36.3 days Average Relet Time 2nd Quarter 07/08 30.75 days No current issues with this indicator. Performance is better than the quarterly target and on target for year end. City Wide Performance – Ranked 2nd across the City 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 52 0 AIRE VALLEY HOMES LEEDS BITMO EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS WEST NORTH WEST HOMES LKI-HMA3: Rent Loss The percentage of the total rent we could collect that is lost because properties are empty Year End Target: 1.4% Currently: 1.22% Variance: 12.86% Favourable 2nd Quarter Target: 1.47% Currently: 1.22% Variance: 17 % Favourable 1.4 1.35 1.3 1.25 1.2 1.15 1.1 1.05 July August September Rent loss monthly as a % Office July ENEHL Total 1.16% Rent loss in £ Office ENEHL Total July 61,230.08 August 1.38% August 58,016.70 September 1.3% September 54,654.67 YTD 1.22% YTD £334,138 Performance is better than monthly and year end target Direction of Travel Year on Year Rent Loss 2nd Quarter 06/07 Rent Loss 2nd Quarter 07/08 1.67% 1.22% No current issues with this indicator. Performance is better than the quarterly and year end target City Wide Performance – Ranked 1st across the City 1.5 1.45 1.4 1.35 1.3 1.25 1.2 1.15 1.1 AIRE VALLEY HOMES LEEDS BITMO EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS 53 WEST NORTH WEST HOMES LKI-HMA6: Voids The percentage of the total number of homes East North East Homes Leeds have that are empty Year End Target: 1.3% Currently: 1.36% Variance: 4.62% Adverse 2nd Quarter Target: 1.34% Currently: 1.36% Variance: 1.49% Favourable 1.48% 1.46% 1.44% 1.42% 1.40% 1.38% 1.36% 1.34% 1.32% 1.30% July August September LOCAL INDICATOR - NO QUARTILE COMPARISONS Voids % by office Office July ENEHL Total 1.42% Number of voids by office Office July ENEHL Total 277 August 1.46% August 284 September 1.36% September Total Voids Relet In Year 265 676 Direction of travel Year on Year Voids 2nd Quarter 2006/07 1.38% Voids 2nd Quarter 2007/08 1.36% No current issues with this indicator. Performance is better than the quarterly target and on target for year end. City Wide Performance – Ranked 1st across the City 1.80% 1.60% 1.40% 1.20% 1.00% 0.80% 0.60% 0.40% 0.20% 54 0.00% AIRE VALLEY HOMES BITMO EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS WEST NORTH WEST HOMES LKI: % of Lets by Ethnicity 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 White British Asian/ Asian British Black/ Black British BELLE ISLE EMB Mixed Background Other Prefer not to say Not Known AIRE VALLEY HOMES LEEDS EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS WEST NORTH WEST HOMES LEEDS Investigations are currently ongoing regarding the lets by ethnicity and cross referenced with representation of the population make up with a view to benchmarking lets and target creation for the third quarter. LKI: % of Lets made through Choice Based Lettings or as a Direct Let 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% AIRE VALLEY HOMES LEEDS BELLE ISLE EMB EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS Direct Let Other WEST NORTH WEST HOMES LEEDS CBL Direct Lets are impacted for ENEHL by the EASEL regeneration project and the number required to assist clearance cases. Also, to discharge duty in Homeless cases whose priority has expired. 55 LKI: % of Lets by Age Group 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Under 20 AIRE VALLEY HOMES LEEDS Under 40 BELLE ISLE EMB Under 60 EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS Over 60 Not Known WEST NORTH WEST HOMES LEEDS Investigations are currently ongoing regarding the lets by age group and cross reference with representation of the population make up with a view to benchmarking and targeting in the third quarter. LKI: Number of Homeless Cases Rehoused By ALMO 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% AIRE VALLEY HOMES LEEDS BELLE ISLE EMB EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS Direct Let Other WEST NORTH WEST HOMES LEEDS CBL 56 LKI: % of Lets by Priority 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% AIRE VALLEY HOMES LEEDS BELLE ISLE EMB EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS Priority Priority Extra WEST NORTH WEST HOMES LEEDS General Needs In view of how the Choice Based Lettings scheme works the lets by priority demonstrates the make up by priority of the applicants applying for our homes 57 Performance Comparison with ALMO Housemark Peer Group How we compare to the 19 National Metropolitan ALMOs in the Housemark Benchmarking Club BV212 Average Relet Times – Ranked 5th out of 17 who submitted data 120.00 100.00 80.00 60.00 40.00 20.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1 Poole Housing Partnership 2 West North West Homes Leeds 3 Berneslai Homes 4 Sandwell Homes 5 East North East Homes Leeds 6 Derby Homes 7 Wolverhampton Homes 8 9 Bolton at Home First Choice Homes 15 16 17 18 19 Nottingham City Homes Six Town Housing Your Homes Newcastle Northwards Housing Wigan and Leigh Housing 10 Solihull Community Housing 11 Golden Gates Housing 12 The Gateshead Housing Company 13 Sheffield Homes 14 Aire Valley Homes Leeds 58 HMA3 Rent Loss – Ranked 3rd out of 15 who submitted data 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Poole Housing Partnership Sandwell Homes East North East Homes Leeds West North West Homes Leeds Derby Homes Aire Valley Homes Leeds Berneslai Homes 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 First Choice Homes Solihull Community Housing Bolton at Home Wolverhampton Homes Six Town Housing Sheffield Homes The Gateshead Housing Company 15 Nottingham City Homes 16 Golden Gates Housing 17 Northwards Housing 18 Wigan and Leigh Housing 19 Your Homes Newcastle 59 05 Repairs This section gives information on the performance of our day to day responsive repairs service. Performance Report 2nd Quarter 2007/08 60 61 BV63 SAP Rating - Energy Efficiency (CPA) Year End Target: 2nd Quarter Target: 79 67.2 66.35 Currently: Currently: 73.2 73.2 Variance: Variance: 8.93% favourable 10.32% favourable 78 77 76 75 74 73 72 71 70 AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL Top Quartile = 68% Average = 64% Bottom Quartile = 60% CPA Upper Threshold 65 Lower Threshold 57 In Year Direction of Travel Year End 06/07 65.5 2nd Quarter 73.2 Change since Year End 7.7 improvement Year on Year Direction of Travel SAP Rating 2nd Quarter 2006/07 No data available SAP Rating 2nd Quarter 2007/08 73.2 Improvement n/a There are no issues with this indicator. Performance is better than the year end and quarterly target. Year end target to therefore be raised to be more challenging. 62 BV184a Proportion of Homes Non-Decent (CPA) Year End Target: 24% 2nd Quarter Target: 29.01% Ranked 2nd across the City 45.00% Currently: Currently: 27.72% 27.72% Variance: Variance: 15.5% Adverse 4.45% Favourable 40.00% 35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL Top Quartile = 43% Median = 54% Average = 53% Bottom Quartile = 65% CPA Upper Threshold 21 Lower Threshold 48 ALMO AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL % Homes Non-Decent 36.83% 23.81% 27.72% 38.58% Rank 3rd 1st 2nd 4th No current issues on this indicator, performance is better than the quarterly target so therefore on target to achieve year end targets. 63 BV184b % Change in Decent Homes (CPA) Year End Target: 29.45% 2nd Quarter End Target 14.73% Ranked 2nd across the City Currently: Currently: 4.91% 4.91% Variance: Variance: 66.1% Adverse 66.6% Adverse 6.00% 5.00% 4.00% 3.00% 2.00% 1.00% 0.00% AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL -1.00% Top Quartile = 11.3% Median = 7% Average = 7% Bottom Quartile = 4.4% CPA Upper Threshold 23.8 Lower Threshold 3.5 ALMO AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL % Change in Decent Homes 2.93% -0.29% 4.91% 5.14% Rank 3rd 4th 2nd 1st The way the % change is calculated in year means a large % change is delivered in the final quarter when a number of schemes come together to deliver the % change. The companion indicator BV184a „Proportion of Homes Non-Decent‟ is better than the quarter target. Concerns therefore are minimal as improvements are being delivered. 64 HMA4 Average Time Taken to Complete Non Urgent Repairs (CPA) Year End Target: 10.5 days Ranked 4th across the City 12 Currently: 10.65 days Variance: 1.43% Adverse 10 8 6 4 2 0 AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL CPA Upper Threshold = 11 days CPA Lower Threshold = 23.37 days ALMO AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL Year End 2006/07 12.96 days 10.15 days 17.91 days 12.02 days July August September (Cumulative) (Cumulative) (Cumulative) 8.83 9.14 9.44 7.56 8.39 8.37 9.50 10.34 10.65 8.79 9.18 9.56 Rank 2nd 1st 4th 3rd Performance on this indicator has slipped to below target although still within the city wide target and CPA upper threshold. Action plans to address this have been agreed with contractors and it has been identified that some system errors exist which may have effected performance as reported. It is hoped these will be resolved and coupled with the agreed remedial actions will result in performance once again being on target for the 3rd quarter. 65 HMA4 – Average time to complete non-urgent repairs by contractor 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SA YE S AY FA IR EA R S ES EL Y EA SA W AY FO ST ER R W IN C JO N EX C AE BA LD AG EN TE L- M IN G D BU IL CONTRACTOR Easaway Draincare Sayes & Co P H Jones Mayfair Security Mears Limited A Baldwin & Co Excel Foster Electrical Building Agency Tel-Aer Services Ltd Construction Services Average time to complete non urgent repairs 7.38 days 2.55 days 3.05 days 3.96 days 12.03 days 11.20 days 14.36 days 1.50 days 9.63 days 8.76 days 10.17 days Number of orders completed 635 924 1009 118 18451 4126 36 201 2952 142 9345 The Excel performance relates to Aids and Adaptations works which should not be included in this indicator. The system has now been amended to exclude these hence only 37 orders recorded, but unfortunately can not be adjusted to remove these 37 records. However only 37 orders means impact to the indicator overall is minimal. C O N ST R U C TI O N SE R PH M VI C ES 66 HMA7 % Urgent Repairs Completed Within Government Timescales (CPA) Target: 97.5% Currently: Ranked 2nd across the City 98.46% Variance: 0.98% Favourable 99 98.5 98 97.5 97 96.5 96 95.5 AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL CPA Upper Threshold = 97% CPA Lower Threshold = 88% ALMO AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL Year End 2006/07 97.53% 98.79% 96.52% 96.22% July August September (Cumulative) (Cumulative) (Cumulative) 98.70% 98.70% 98.41% 98.60% 98.73% 98.78% 98.67% 98.47% 98.46% 96.15% 96.67% 96.72% Rank 3rd 1st 2nd 4th There are no issues currently on this indicator performance is better than target. 67 HMA7 - % Urgent repairs completed on time by contractor 101 100 99 98 97 96 95 94 93 SA YE S AY FA IR C Y ES S EA SA W AY FO ST ER R EA R W IN JO N AE BA LD AG EN TE L- M IN G BU IL CONTRACTOR Easaway Draincare Sayes & Co P H Jones Mayfair Security Mears Limited A Baldwin & Co Foster Electrical Building Agency Tel-Aer Construction Services % urgent repairs completed on time 98.95% 98.38% 97.15% 95.56% 97.69% 99.49% 100% 98.18% 100% 99.33% C O N ST R U C TI O D N SE R PH M VI C ES 68 HMA13 % Responsive Appointments Made and Kept (CPA) Target: 96% Ranked 1st across the City Currently: 97.13% Variance: 1.18% Favourable 97.2 97 96.8 96.6 96.4 96.2 96 95.8 AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL Top Quartile = 75% Median = 65% Average = 61.4% Bottom Quartile = 53.7% CPA Upper Threshold = 85.60% CPA Lower Threshold = 11.50% Average performance cumulative for year to date as per the BVPI calculation ALMO (Cumulative) AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL % 97.03% 96.52% 97.13% 96.32% Rank 2nd 3rd 1st 4th There are no issues currently on this indicator, performance is better than target. However, in view of performance levels achieved, contractors have been given an informal target of 98% to demonstrate continued improvements. 69 HMA13 – Responsive appointments made and kept by contractor. 102 100 98 96 94 92 90 88 86 84 BALDWIN SAYES PH JONES MEARS BUILDING AGENCY CONSTRUCTION SERVICES CONTRACTOR A Baldwin & Co Sayes & Co P H Jones Mears Limited Building Agency Construction Services % appointments made & kept 96.63% 89.69% 99.48% 95.00% 99.75% 99.34% 70 % of Appointed Repairs Completed at First Visit (1st Time Hits) Year End Target: 2nd Quarter Target: Ranked 2nd across the City Currently: Currently: 95.98% 95.98% Variance: Variance: 97.5 97 96.5 96 95.5 95 94.5 94 93.5 AVHL BITMO ENEHL WHWHL ALMO (Cumulative) AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL % 95.87% 96.99% 95.98% 94.97% Rank 3rd 1st 2nd 4th 71 HMA14 % of Repair Orders Raised that were Emergency or Urgent (CPA) Year End Target: 27% 2nd Quarter Target: 28.16% Ranked 2nd across the City Currently: Currently: 29.12% 29.12% Variance: Variance: 7.85% Adverse 3.41% Adverse 29.5 29 28.5 28 27.5 27 26.5 26 AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL ALMO (Cumulative) AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL % 29.18% 29.12% 29.12% 27.32% Rank 4th 2nd 2nd 1st Annual Direction of Travel Performance 2nd Quarter Performance 2006/07 29.33% 1st Quarter Performance 2007/08 28.87% 2nd Quarter Performance 2007/08 29.12% 2nd Quarter Performance 2007/08 29.13% Change 0.21% Improved ENEHL Change 0.26% Improved ENEHL 72 Customer Satisfaction with Repairs Service Target: 96.00% Currently: Ranked 2nd across the City 95.19% Variance: N/A 97 96.5 96 95.5 95 94.5 94 93.5 93 92.5 AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL ALMO AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL July August September (Cumulative) (Cumulative) (Cumulative) 93.62% 93.72% 93.9% 95.90% 97.19% 96.65% 92.53% 94.39% 95.19% 94.12% 94.50% 94.72% Individual month’s performance Rank 4th 1st 2nd 3rd ALMO AVHL BITMO ENEHL WNWHL July 76.00% 83.33% 95.55% 94.11% End 1st Quarter 87.17% August 100% 98.90% 96.69% 95.50% September 100% 92.31% 97.62% 97.17% Change 8.02% Improvement ENEHL End 2nd Quarter 95.19% Progress has been made inputting the previous backlog of satisfaction returns. This has improved performance month on month which has also assisted the year to date cumulative position. This has informed and enabled a target to be set of 96.00% for the 3rd quarter which will then be reviewed for year end. 73 Performance Comparisons with ALMO Housemark Peer Group How we compare to the 19 National Metropolitan ALMOs in the Housemark Benchmarking Club HMA4 Average Time to Complete Non Urgent Repairs – Ranked 9th out of 16 who entered data 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Sandwell Homes Derby Homes Berneslai Homes Wolverhampton Homes West North West Homes Leeds Your Homes Newcastle Aire Valley Homes Leeds 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Nottingham City Homes East North East Homes Leeds Sheffield Homes Poole Housing Partnership Bolton at Home The Gateshead Housing Company First Choice Homes 15 Six Town Housing 16 Golden Gates Housing 17 Northwards Housing 18 Solihull Community Housing 19 Wigan and Leigh Housing Performance is better than Sheffield Homes and Bolton at Homes which are 3 star ALMO‟s. 74 HMA7 % Urgent Repairs Completed Within Government Timescales – Ranked 4th out of 12 who submitted data 100.00 95.00 90.00 85.00 80.00 75.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Sandwell Homes Your Homes Newcastle Aire Valley Homes Leeds East North East Homes Leeds First Choice Homes Gateshead Housing Company (The) Six Town Housing 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Poole Housing Partnership Solihull Community Housing Nottingham City Homes Berneslai Homes Bolton At Home Derby Homes Golden Gates Housing 15 Northwards Housing 16 Sheffield Homes 17 West North West Homes Leeds 18 Wigan and Leigh Housing 19 Wolverhampton Homes Performance is better than Sheffield Homes and Bolton at Homes which are 3 star ALMO‟s. 75 HMA13 % of Appointments Made and Kept – Ranked 2nd out of 15 who submitted data 120.00 100.00 80.00 60.00 40.00 20.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Wolverhampton Homes East North East Homes Leeds Aire Valley Homes Leeds West North West Homes Leeds Golden Gates Housing Sheffield Homes Your Homes Newcastle 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Nottingham City Homes Sandwell Homes Solihull Community Housing Berneslai Homes Derby Homes Gateshead Housing Company (The) Bolton At Home 15 Six Town Housing 16 First Choice Homes 17 Northwards Housing Poole Housing Partnership Wigan and Leigh 19 Housing 18 Performance is better than Sheffield Homes and Bolton at Homes which are 3 star ALMO‟s. 76 06 Income Management This section provides information about how good we are at managing the rent collection and arrears service Performance Report 2nd Quarter 2007/8 77 78 BV66a: Rent Collection and Arrears Recovery (CPA High Risk) Rent collection and arrears the proportion of the of rent collected (TQ 97.82%) Year End Target: 97.6% Quarter 2: 95.91% Variance: 1.73% Adverse 2nd Quarter Target 97.28% Quarter 2 : 95.91% Variance: 1.41% Adverse 96.6 96.5 96.4 96.3 96.2 96.1 96 95.9 95.8 95.7 95.6 95.5 July August September Office YTD ENEHL Total July 96.02% August 96.54% September 95.91% Sept Quartile 3rd Performance peaked in August due to the impact of the traditional no charge week at August bank holiday City Wide Position – ENEHL Ranked 1st across the City 96.5 96 95.5 95 94.5 94 93.5 93 92.5 92 91.5 AIRE VALLEY HOMES LEEDS BITMO EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS WEST NORTH WEST HOMES 79 The official quarter end results do not include the 1st of the month Direct Debit credits due for September as direct debits are collected in arrears, September was a 5 week month and the 1st of October was a Monday. Therefore, to more accurately reflect the 1st quarter performance, information as at week 27 which includes the credits is also provided below. BV66a: Rent Collection and Arrears Recovery (CPA High Risk) Rent collection and arrears the proportion of the of rent collected (TQ 97.82%) Year End Target: 97.6% Week 27: 96.46% Variance: 1.17% Adverse nd 2 Quarter Target 97.28% Week 27: 96.46% Variance: 0.84% Adverse Position at Week 27 after Monthly 1st of the month Direct Debits have been credited to rent accounts 96.6 96.5 96.4 96.3 96.2 96.1 96 95.9 95.8 95.7 July August September Top Quartile = 97.82% and above 2 Quartile = 97.27% 3 Quartile = 96.4% CPA Upper Threshold = 98.2% CPA Lower Threshold = 96.18% nd rd Office YTD ENEHL Total July 96.02% August 96.54% September 96.46% Sept Quartile 3rd City Wide Position – ENEHL Ranked 2nd across the City 97 96.5 96 95.5 95 94.5 94 93.5 93 92.5 92 AIRE VALLEY HOMES LEEDS BITMO EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS 80 WEST NORTH WEST HOMES In year Direction of Travel Rent Collection 1st Quarter Rent Collection 2nd Quarter 2007/08 2007/08 95.69% 96.46% % Change +0.71% This is also a like for like comparison showing rent collection after the monthly 1st of the month direct debits have been credited to the rent account but with a weeks rent credit still outstanding. The amount associated with this weeks rent still outstanding is £19,733 and when adding this back on collection equals 96.54% Plus Sept Direct Debits credits £19,733 Rent Collection 2nd Quarter 2007/08 with outstanding September M1DD credits 96.54% It is of concern however that performance has not yet achieved and improved on that of the previous financial year end. Also, and in particular that it has declined on that of the same quarter in the previous year. This situation is city wide and Strategic Landlord are also concerned and have asked us to identify if nationally there is an issue via our membership of the House Mark Peer group Benchmarking. For details please see benchmarking information at the end of this report. It is also a concern as within most of our areas it has been noticed that the doorstep lenders were already promoting high interest rate loans for Christmas. The promotion are very powerfully presented and it is easy to see how our tenants would be drawn in. Performance Trends Annual comparisons 98 97 96 95 94 93 92 91 90 89 88 87 April May June July August September 2006/07 October 2007/08 November December January February March Factors affecting performance remain from the 1st quarter end and still include the direct debit credits and the increased level of ongoing recovery 81 Annual Direction of Travel Rent Collection 2nd Quarter Rent Collection 2nd Quarter 2006/07 2007/08 96.63% 96.46% % Change -0.17% This is a like with like comparison as each of the figures includes the Direct Debit credits but with a weeks credit outstanding.  Outstanding Housing Benefit It is a KLOE requirement to be able to report arrears performance net of any outstanding Housing Benefit and this also affects collection. Area Offices have £43,859 of Housing Benefit outstanding. When adding this back in collection equals 96.63% Rent Collection 2nd Quarter 2007/08 with outstanding Housing Benefit added on 96.63% Housing Benefit Outstanding £43,859 The table below shows performance with the monthly 1 st of the month direct debit credits and outstanding Housing Benefit added on. This gives rent collection performance at 96.71% HB Outstanding at Week 26 £43,859 Plus Sept Direct Debits credits £19,733 Rent Collection 2nd Quarter 2007/08 with outstanding HB added on & September M1DD credits 96.71% Actions to address performance issues on collection and within the Income Management indicators are: A 2nd quarter Accounts manager performance away day was held early October and a long term Income Management Strategy agreed including quarterly Accounts Managers away days and action plans for the each quarter, The 3rd quarter action plan and Christmas campaign was agreed. Early November the Christmas campaign to commence with a combined campaign to „counter‟ the doorstep lender and loan shark activities with poster and leaflets of a „Don‟t feed the sharks at Christmas this year‟ campaign, countering the high interest loan promotions and promoting the Leeds City Credit Union „Handiloan‟ as an alternative as „affordable credit‟ can help you keep your rent account clear. On the reverse it also promotes the prize draw incentives for having a clear rent account. Different leaflets have been designed to factor in at two week intervals to complement weekly arrears blitzes for week commencing 12th November up to Christmas, half the office areas covered each week, and the whole area covered every two weeks and then a new leaflet with the next blitz. As a joint campaign, LCCU are also part financing the poster and leaflet production and it also has the full approval of the Illegal Money Lending Team.     82   52 staff have received debt advice training from St Vincent‟s support centre, one of the Leeds Money Advice Partners. The Lead Officer for Income Management and Financial Inclusion has worked with the Leeds Financial Inclusion Steering Group to draw up a briefing paper to address the application of ongoing recovery in instances where it could lead to possession and eviction. A meeting is to be held with Benefits Agency and Corporate Collection with a view to ongoing recovery not being applied where it could lead to possession To raise the profile and promote our Housing Benefit Advisor Service and for those to target high arrears cases to identify gaps in benefit and work with customers to apply for backdates.  83 BV66b Rent collection and Arrears Recovery % of tenants with more than 7 weeks arrears as a % of the total number of ENEHL tenants Year End Target: 6.15% Currently: 6.18% Variance: 0.49% Adverse nd 2 Quarter Target 6.4% Currently: 6.18% Variance: 3.44% Favourable 6.2 6.18 6.16 6.14 6.12 6.1 6.08 6.06 6.04 6.02 6 July August September Top Quartile = 4.39% and below 2 Quartile = 5.86% nd 3 Quartile = 8.35% rd Office YTD July August September Variance on previous month ENEHL Total Value 6.09% £1,079,608 6.17% £1,056,375 Week 27 6.18% £1, 092,669 £1,065,445 +0.01% +£36,294 +£9,070 City Wide Performance - Ranked 1st across the City 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 AIRE VALLEY HOMES LEEDS BITMO EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS WEST NORTH WEST HOMES 84 Annual Direction of Travel % tenants 7 weeks+ arrears 2nd Quarter 06/07 6.88% £ tenants 7 weeks+ arrears 2nd Quarter 06/07 £1,094,992 In Year Direction of Travel % tenants 7 weeks+ arrears 1st Quarter 07/08 5.97% £ tenants 7 weeks+ arrears 1st Quarter 07/08 £1,111,786 % tenants 7 weeks+ arrears 2nd Quarter 07/08 6.18% £ tenants 7 weeks+ arrears 2nd Quarter 07/08 £1, 092,669 1st Quarter Performance 5.97% 2nd Quarter Performance 6.18% Change on previous quarter +0.21% Change on previous quarter -£19,117 % tenants 7 weeks+ arrears 2nd Quarter 07/08 6.18% £ tenants 7 weeks+ arrears 2nd Quarter 07/08 £1,092,669 ENEHL Year End Performance 6.65% Improvement on Year End -0.47% Although performance appears to be deteriorating month on month, the 2nd quarter performance has improved on year end and is better than 2nd quarter target. Factors effecting collection also impact on this indicator and the actions to address performance concerns include actions to reduce high arrears cases. It is hoped the planned actions will result in further improvements on this indicator, in particular the work of the Housing Benefit Advisors 85 BV66c Rent collection and Arrears Recovery Percentage of tenants in arrears who have had a Notice Seeking Possession Served Year End Target: 27% Currently: 8% Variance: 70.4% Favourable st 1 Quarter Target: 13.5% Currently: 8% Variance: 40.7% Favourable 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 July August September Top Quartile = 26.05% and below 2 Quartile = 30.12% 3 Quartile = 43.15% nd rd Office ENEHL Total Direction of Travel July YTD 6% August YTD 7.06% Sept YTD 8% On Target? On Target End of 2nd Quarter 2006/07 Performance 12.3% End of 2nd Quarter 2007/08 Performance 8% City Wide Performance - Ranked 2nd across the City 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% AIRE VALLEY HOMES LEEDS BITMO EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS WEST NORTH WEST HOMES Currently there are no issues with this indicator, performance is better than target and the Direction of Travel demonstrates improvements. 86 BV66d Rent Collection and Arrears Recovery The percentage of tenants evicted as a result of rent arrears Year End Target: 0.225% Currently: 0.1% Variance: st 1 Quarter Target 0.125% Currently: 0.1% Variance: 0.12 55.56% Favourable 20% Favourable 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 July August September Top Quartile = 0.3700% and below 2 Quartile = 0.5000% nd 3 Quartile = 0.7900% rd The above graph shows year to date percentage of evictions Office Monthly Performance July August September Tenants YTD % Target ENEHL Total 0.0789% 0.0895% 0.1% 19 0.1% On Target Performance is better than target City Wide Performance – Ranked 1st across the City 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 AIRE VALLEY HOMES LEEDS BITMO EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS WEST NORTH WEST HOMES 87 Performance Trends % of tenant evicted as a result of rent arrears 2nd Quarter 06/07 0.1239% Number of tenants evicted as a result of rent arrears 2nd Quarter 06/07 24 % of tenants evicted as a result of rent arrears 2nd Quarter 07/08 0.1% Number of tenants evicted as a result of rent arrears 2nd Quarter 07/08 19 The direction of travel shows an improvement year on year. It is also hoped the training carried with out with some staff on a more supportive approach to income management may further reduce the level of evictions. It is hoped this continued approach will assist with the very high historic and neglected cases to minimise the risk of having to take a „hit‟ on his indicator as was predicted, and this will help keep performance remaining on target. 88 LKI-HMA1: Rent Arrears (TQ 2.6%) The percentage of rent that is owed to us Year End Target: 2.75% Quarter 2: nd 2 Quarter Target 2.9% Quarter 2: 3.5 3.47% 3.47% Variance: Variance: 26.2% Adverse 19.7% Adverse 3.4 3.3 3.2 3.1 3 2.9 July August September Office ENEHL Total HMA1 £ Value Office ENEHL Total July 3.3% August 3.1% September Variance on Previous Month 3.47% +0.37% Sept Quartile 3rd July £1,668,627 August £1,672,037 September £1,755,373 Variance on Previous Month +£83,336 Performance improved at the end of August due to the impact of the traditional no charge week at August Bank Holiday City Wide Performance – Ranked 1st across the City 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 AIRE VALLEY HOMES LEEDS BITMO EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS WEST NORTH WEST HOMES 89 LKI-HMA1: Rent Arrears (TQ 2.6%) The percentage of rent that is owed to us Year End Target: 2.75% Week 27: nd 2 Quarter Target 2.9% Week 27: 3.22% 3.22% Variance: Variance: 17.1% Adverse 11% Adverse Position at Week 27 after Monthly 1st of the month Direct Debits have been credited to rent accounts 3.35 3.3 3.25 3.2 3.15 3.1 3.05 3 July August September Top Quartile = 2.6% and below 2 Quartile =2.6 to 3.1% 3rd Quartile = 3.1 to 4.4% nd Office ENEHL Total HMA1 £ Value Office ENEHL Total July 3.3% August 3.1% September 3.22% Variance on Previous Month +0.12% March Quartile 3rd July £1,668,627 August £1,569,510 September £1,630,522 Variance on Previous Month +£61,012 Week 27 City Wide Performance – Ranked 1st across the City Factors effecting collection performance also impact on this indicator. 6 5 4 3 2 1 90 0 AIRE VALLEY HOMES LEEDS BITMO EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS WEST NORTH WEST HOMES Arrears Performance Net of Housing Benefit due Reporting arrears net of the amount of outstanding Housing Benefit due is a KLOE requirement and also demonstrates the impact on performance. Area Offices have outstanding Housing Benefit of £43,859 The table below shows these amounts for week 27 and performance with the amount and that of the outstanding direct debits factored in. HB Outstanding 2nd Quarter 07/08 £43,859 Direct debit amount outstanding £19,733 £ Arrears net of these amounts £1,566,930 % Arrears net of these amounts 3.1% Annual Direction of Travel % rent arrears 2nd quarter 06/07 3.29% In Year Direction of Travel % rent arrears 1st quarter 2007/08 3.2 % % rent arrears 2nd quarter 2007/08 3.22% Change +0.02% % rent arrears 2nd quarter 07/08 3.22% Change -0.07% These comparisons are like with like as they show performance with a weeks rent outstanding due to Direct Debit credit cycles HMA1 Annual Comparison Performance Trends 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Year End April May June July August September October November December January February March 2006/07 2007/08 There are concerns around arrears performance as with collection. The actions to address collection performance also address arrears performance issues. 91 Arrears per Property The total arrears divided by the number of properties, in £s Year End Target: £71.14 Currently: £83.65 Variance: nd 2 Quarter Target: £73.24 Currently: £83.65 Variance: 17.59% Adverse 14.2% Adverse Position taken at week 27 after M1DDs have been credited to rent account £86.00 £85.00 £84.00 £83.00 £82.00 £81.00 £80.00 £79.00 £78.00 £77.00 July August September Month 2006/07 Average Amount in £ 2007/08 Average Amount in £ April May June July August September £93.91 £90.47 £86.97 £83.56 £87.36 £84.97 Properties in Area Total Current Tenants Arrears £75.84 £80.50 £83.09 £85.45 £80.42 £83.65 Average Arrears per Property ENEHL TOTAL 19,493 £1,630,522 £83.65 Arrears per Property 2nd Quarter 06/07 Arrears Per Property 2nd Quarter 07/08 £84.97 £83.65 st City Wide Performance – Ranked 1 across the City £160.00 £140.00 £120.00 £100.00 £80.00 £60.00 £40.00 £20.00 £AIRE VALLEY HOMES LEEDS BITMO EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS WEST NORTH WEST HOMES 92 HMA8: Former Tenants Arrears – Amount of FTA and Income Target: Increase in Collection to 50% Reduce Terminations by 10% Currently: Collection: 47.7% Terminations: No comparative data % collected is the total amount recovered from all outstanding FTAs. For performance purposes this is reported as a % of newly terminated debt. Both factors are then measured against the same position in the previous year, to identify improvements. £60,000 £50,000 £40,000 £30,000 £20,000 £10,000 £0 April May June July August September Terminations October November December January February March Income The above graph shows the monthly amount terminated and the amount of income collected every month. This is a local indicator which has previously been reported in the former Leeds East Homes. This was introduced to compliment the BV66 suite of current indicators, minimise evictions and terminations and maximise the opportunity for the Management fee incentive. However, although the former Leeds South East Homes also reported on terminations the former Leeds North East Homes did not. Therefore we are unable to collate historic information in order to set targets for the 1st quarter. However, at this 2nd quarter point, we have 6 months data to present and inform targets which have been set to reduce terminated amounts by 10% and increase collection rates to at least 50% of the amounts terminated. This will be reviewed again at the end of the 3rd quarter. Performance up to Week 26 (YTD) ENEHL Terminated £191,631.69 Collected £91,432.57 Collection Rate 47.7% Monthly performance July August September Terminations £50,964.58 £24,175.98 £25,869.11 Income £14,232.16 £15,655.13 £16390.65 % collected 27.93% 64.75% 63.36% Terminations were up in July due to a number of historic high arrears evictions being carried out in the Meanwood area. 93 HMA8a – Total FTA Outstanding as a Proportion of the Rent Roll The total FTA Outstanding as a % of the Total Rent Roll Year End Target: 2.5% Currently: 3.47% Variance: rd Currently Ranked 3 Across the City on this Indicator 5.00% 38.8% Adverse 4.50% 4.00% 3.50% 3.00% 2.50% 2.00% 1.50% 1.00% 0.50% 0.00% AIRE VALLEY HOMES BITMO EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS WEST NORTH WEST HOMES LEEDS AIRE VALLEY HOMES BITMO EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS WEST NORTH WEST HOMES LEEDS Total FTA Debt £1,996,576 £142,872 £1,753,294 £1,813,729 Rent Roll £42,736,796 £5,286,606 £50,564,797 £57,133,774 % 4.67% 2.70% 3.47% 3.17% HMA8b – Average Amount in £ Owed by Former Tenants The average amount owed by Former Tenants Year End Target: £500 Currently: £583.07 st Currently Ranked 1 Across the City on this Indicator 680 Variance: 16.6% Adverse 660 640 620 600 580 560 540 AIRE VALLEY HOMES BITMO EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS WEST NORTH WEST HOMES LEEDS AIRE VALLEY HOMES BITMO EAST NORTH EAST HOMES LEEDS WEST NORTH WEST HOMES LEEDS Number of FTA Accounts 3,353 217 3,007 2,940 Total FTA Debt £1,996,576.46 £142,872.19 £1,753,293.64 £1,813,729.05 Average FTA in £ 595.46 658.40 583.07 616.91 94 Performance Comparisons with ALMO Housemark Peer Group How we compare to the 19 National Metropolitan ALMOs in the Housemark Benchmarking Club BV66a Rent Collection - Ranked 8th out of 15 that submitted data 99.00 98.00 97.00 96.00 95.00 94.00 93.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Your Homes Newcastle Golden Gates Housing Sheffield Homes Sandwell Homes Berneslai Homes The Gateshead Housing Company Solihull Community Housing 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 East North East Homes Leeds First Choice Homes Wolverhampton Homes West North West Homes Leeds Nottingham City Homes Six Town Housing Aire Valley Homes Leeds 15 Derby Homes 16 Bolton at Home 17 Northwards Housing 18 Poole Housing Partnership 19 Wigan and Leigh Housing Performance is better than Derby Homes and Bolton at Home which are 3 star organisations. In year performance from year end to 2nd quarter for members of the peer group has also been looked at to establish if the apparent decline is a national problem. It has been established that of the 15 ALMO‟s who submitted 13 have declined performance, all but one with a higher decline than East North East Homes Leeds. Derby for example, a 3 star ALMO have declined 3.67%, Wolverhampton by 1.73% and First Choice Homes by 0.76%. East North East Homes Leeds has an in year decline of 0.5%. In relation to annual ENEHL‟s Direction of Travel comparisons with the same quarter last year, only 10 ALMOs apart from ENEHL submitted comparative information. Of these ten, five have declined since last years position, including Sheffield by 0.57%. Derby by 0.29% and Wolverhampton by 0.3% against East North East Homes Leeds decline of 0.17%. Therefore it does seem that the problem of increasing debt is impacting on collection and arrears on a 95 national basis. We hope our action plans and campaigns coupled with our incentive scheme will assist to „buck‟ this trend by year end. 96 BV66b % of tenants with 7 or more weeks Arrears - Ranked 7th out of 17 that submitted data 16.00 14.00 12.00 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Sandwell Homes Bolton at Home Berneslai Homes Wolverhampton Homes Solihull Community Housing Poole Housing Partnership East North East Homes Leeds 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 West North West Homes Leeds Aire Valley Homes Leeds Golden Gates Housing First Choice Homes The Gateshead Housing Company Six Town Housing Sheffield Homes 15 Your Homes Newcastle 16 17 18 19 Nottingham City Homes Derby Homes Northwards Housing Wigan and Leigh Housing Performance is better than Derby Homes and Bolton at Home which are 3 star organisations 97 BV66c % of NISPs Served – Ranked 1st out of 15 that submitted data 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 East North East Homes Leeds West North West Homes Leeds Golden Gates Housing Aire Valley Homes Leeds S0olhull Community Housing Bolton at Home Derby Homes 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 The Gateshead Housing Company Nottingham City Homes Sandwell Homes Berneslai Homes Six Town Housing Sheffield Homes First Choice Homes 15 Wolverhampton Homes 16 Northwards Housing 17 Poole Housing Partnership 18 Wigan and Leigh Housing 19 Your Homes Newcastle Performance is better than all the 3 star ALMOs within our Peer Group 98 BV66d % of tenants evicted due to Rent Arrears – Ranked 3rd out of 15 that submitted data 1.40 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Poole Housing Partnership Solihull Community Housing East North East Homes Leeds West North West Homes Leeds Aire Valley Homes Leeds Bolton at Home Derby Homes 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Wolverhampton Homes The Gateshead Housing Company Sandwell Homes Your Homes Newcastle Golden Gates Housing Berneslai Homes Six Town Housing 15 Sheffield Homes 16 Nottingham City Homes 17 First Choice Homes 18 Northwards Housing 19 Wigan and Leigh Housing Performance is better than all the 3 star ALMOs within our Peer Group 99 HMA1 % Rent Arrears – Ranked 6th out of 10 who submitted data 5.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Wolverhampton Homes Sandwell Homes Poole Housing Partnership Derby Homes First Choice Homes East North East Homes Leeds Six Town Housing 8 9 The Gateshead Housing Company Aire Valley Homes Leeds 15 16 17 18 19 Sheffield Homes Solihull Community Housing West North West Homes Leeds Wigan and Leigh Housing Your Homes Newcastle 10 Nottingham City Homes 11 Berneslai Homes 12 Bolton at Home 13 Golden Gates Housing 14 Northwards Housing 100 07 Estate Management Performance Report 2nd Quarter 2007/08 101 102 Environmental Audit Number of Actions we did after an estate inspection and also the number of referrals made to other agencies 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Actions Referrals 85.7% of all ENEHLs areas were audited in the 2nd quarter 2nd Quarter Performance ENEHL Total Actions Referrals % estate audits completed 910 387 85.7% Referrals were to:Litter Picking 22 Grassed Areas/Verges require cut 41 Fly Tipping 79 Highways - Footpaths and Roads 16 Environmental Health Issues 16 No. of Smashed/Broken Windows 76 Referrals to Mayfair Security 24 Chutes 45 No. of Fire Doors reported 17 Others 51 Referrals to Estate Caretaker Team 193 Referrals to Probabtion Team 4 Actions included:Overgrown Garden/Hedges: Letters sent Rubbish in Gardens: Letters sent Good Garden Letters/awards sent Unauthorised Drive/No Dropped Kerb Unroadworthy Vehicles in Gdn/Parking areas Unauthorised Aterations/Extensions Unauthorised Structures - eg. Garages Animals eg in MSFs/Non Domestic Other breaches of the Tenancy Agreement: 364 139 160 20 4 4 1 7 14 103 Estate Management Commentary This quarter there has been an incomplete environmental audit at Harehills & Chapeltown/Meanwood Office. This has been due to additional workload caused by the setting up of the new area office teams, splitting and training of the former specialist teams into their new roles together with vacancies in key management positions pending the recent restructuring and recruitment process. The new Area Office teams are now in place and fully staffed in management positions". This will be resolved for the third quarter ENEHL has joined the Housemark Estate Services benchmarking group and is due to attend the next meeting at which the Audit Commission is to attend to discuss potential performance indicators. Services being looked at are:     Caretaking and Cleaning Grounds Maintenance Dealing with Environmental Issues Involving tenants in setting service standards and monitoring estate services Maintaining communal areas This is linked to the recent white paper and the single set of 198 National Indicators to be implemented from April 2008. Indicators that reflect the ‟Strong and Prosperous; communities theme of the paper. More information will be reported in the third quarter report. 104 08 Anti Social Behaviour Performance Report 2nd Quarter 2007/08 105 Envir 106 Anti Social Behaviour Audit Audit – 3rd Quarter Summary of Cases and Working Hours Involved Per Office Area Total Number of New Cases This Quarter 138 Hours Spent on ASB Cases 949.98* East North East Homes Leeds * Three offices did not enter a figure on the form. Incidents in the second quarter across ENEHL:Drug/Substance Misuse / dealing 46 Street Drinking 19 Begging 2 Sexual Acts 6 Abandoned Cars 0 Vehicle related nuisance 60 Noise 166 Rowdy Behaviour 53 Nuisance Behaviour 146 Animal Related Problems 27 Intimidation/harassment 75 Criminal damage / vandalism 46 Litter/Rubbish 31 Graffiti 14 Other 5 No of Hate Incident Reports this quarter Race 23 Sexual orientation 0 Actions carried out by ENEHL staff in the 2nd quarter Advice + assistance given at office - no further action required Complaint Acknowledgements Sent to Complainant Number of Letter 1s sent No. interview with complainants No. interviews with perpetrators No. visits with no access No. letter 2s Pre-Caution Letters Sent No. outcome letters to Complainant No. outcome letters to Perpetrator No of cases referred to mediation this quarter No. referrals to Victim Support Case conferences held Meetings with Police Meetings with Anti Social Behaviour Unit No of cautions served this quarter No of Anti Social Behaviour Introductory Tenancy notices served this quarter No of cases referred to Anti Social Behaviour Unit this quarter Total ASB Cases outstanding with local offices = 479 107 145 195 174 295 197 64 31 137 137 10 3 5 87 42 10 4 18 108