Beech Housing Association Ltd. Board papers for agenda items 3.1 to 4.2: Membership matters: 3.1 Report back from representatives of Chair (verbal) Adactus’ Board 3.2 Minutes of the meeting of 2 August 2010 Chair (enclosed) 3.3 Matters arising from the minutes of 2 Chair (verbal) August 2010 Members briefing 4.1 General update H. Roberts (enclosed) 4.2 Impact of the Comprehensive Spending H. Roberts (enclosed) Review Report of Meeting Date Item No. Norma Couldwell Beech Housing Chair Association Board 15 November 2010 3.3 MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING PURPOSE OF REPORT 1. To seek board approval of the minutes of the previous meeting. BACKGROUND 2. The minutes of the previous meeting are attached at Appendix 1. RISK ISSUES 3. The issue raised and recommendations made in this report involve risk considerations in the following categories: Financial impact Business interruption Health and safety Reputation and image Asset loss Corporate objectives/performance 4. Once approved a signed copy of the minutes will be held on record in the Association’s minute book. VALUE FOR MONEY/SUSTAINABILITY/EQUALITY/CONSULTATION IMPLICATIONS 5. None directly. RECOMMENDATION(S) 6. That the Board approves the minutes of the previous meeting. NORMA COULDWELL CHAIR There are no background papers to this report. Report Author Tel Date Doc ID Brian Moran 01942 608715 5.11.2010 AHA report Nov 2010 1 Appendix 1 BEECH HOUSING ASSOCIATION LTD 2 AUGUST 2010 Present: M. Delaney, C. Eden, D. Gilkes, P. Lees (Group Chief Executive), D. Woods, J. Clayton Also in attendance: P Chisnell (Group Director of Finance), H. Roberts (Deputy Group CE/Director of Development), K. Fay (Operations Director AHA), O. Baker (Chair AHG), B. Moran (Group Company Secretary) APOLOGIES ACTION Agenda Item 1 None DECLARATION OF INTERESTS Agenda Item 2 There were none. MEMBERSHIP MATTERS Agenda Item 3 3.1 David Kelly The Group Company Secretary reported that David Kelly had resigned from the board. 3.2 Appointment of new members Jane Clayton was duly accepted as a shareholder and appointed as a board member. Agenda Item 4 Report back from the Representative of Adactus’ Board The Chair reported back that the Group board had approved the Group’s 2010 – 2030 business plan, a new probity policy and an AHG bank account. MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 26 April 2010 Agenda Item 5 The minutes of the meeting of 26 April 2010 were approved by the board. MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES OF 25 August 2009 Agenda Item 6 There were none. 6. Matters arising 6.1 Sarah Point update The Group Director of Development reported that the Sarah Point Kickstart bid had been approved on Friday 23 April 2010 2 STRATEGIC DECISIONS Agenda Item 7 7. Members briefing 7.1 Director of Operations report The report of the Operations Director AHA was accepted as presented and it was resolved to note the content of the report. 8. Strategic decisions 8.1 HR Strategy In response to a question from a member, the Deputy Group CE/Group Director of Development confirmed that group-wide, 14 staff were employed through the Future Jobs fund but that these were not in ‘traditional’ apprenticeship roles. The proposed apprenticeship scheme would be a new initiative that involved planning a career path for the trainee at the end of the training. In response to further questions, the DGCE confirmed that the group’s members required apprentices to be appointed as part of larger contracts and explained that the permanent health insurance scheme applied to full and part time staff but not currently to hourly paid staff. The board members questioned the DGCE regarding the buying and selling holidays scheme and were supportive of the idea. The report of the Deputy Group CE/Group Director of Development was accepted as presented and it was resolved to approve the draft Human Resource Strategy for consideration by the Group board. 8.2 Board away day report The report of the Operations Director AHA was accepted as presented and it was resolved to : a) agree to an independent health check of the DLO; b) note that Board papers will be issued electronically via iPads in future; c) note the progress against the Audit Commission Inspection Plan; agree the methodology outlined to consult with residents on developing our local offer. 8.3 Resident Involvement Review The report of the Operations Director AHA was accepted as presented and it was resolved that: a) a full cost benefit analysis of resident involvement be carried out; and b) further research into alternative methods of delivering the scrutiny function be developed and that tenants be consulted on this 8.4 Risk management strategy This report was deferred to a future meeting. 9. Policy and Framework decisions 9.1 Former Tenant Arrears write offs The report of the Director of Operations AHA was accepted as presented and it was resolved to write off £9,903.22 of former tenant rent arrears. 9.2 Annual Governance Review In response to a question from a member, the Group Company Secretary confirmed that the Association did not currently pay bonuses to staff. 3 The report of the Group Company Secretary was accepted as presented and it was resolved to adopt the NHF’s Excellence in Government code, review its governance arrangements and approve changes to the board members’ handbook. 10. One-off decisions 10.1 Review of Annual Accounts The report of the Group Director of Finance was accepted as presented and it was resolved to approve the financial statements of Beech Housing Association Limited. 10.2 Review and update of Financial Regulations In response to a question from a board member, the Group Director of Finance confirmed that the system for credit cards was reviewed 12 months ago and that usage was monitored on a monthly basis. He confirmed that we would adopt similar procedures with respect to fuel cards. The report of the Group Director of Finance was accepted as presented and it was resolved to approve the revised financial regulations. 10.3 Authorised loan signatories This report was deferred to a future meeting. 10.4 Sandy Lane, Clayton Le Woods In response to a question from a member, the Deputy Group CE/Group Director of Development confirmed that the scheme would be marketed as both shared ownership and as rent to homebuy. The report of the Deputy Group CE/Group Director of Development was accepted as presented and it was resolved to approve the acquisition at cost of 3 three bed houses for rent to homebuy or shared ownership at cost from Adactus HA at the former Radburn Works site, Sandy Lane, Clayton–le Woods, Chorley. 10.5 Dog & Partridge Charnock Richard In response to comments from members, the Deputy Group CE/Group Director of Development agreed that the housing market appeared to be improving. She reported that applicants seemed to be encountering less difficulties in recent months with respect to obtaining mortgages for shared ownership properties. The report of the Deputy Group CE/Group Director of Development was accepted as presented and it was resolved to approve the acquisition of 4 three bed houses and 1 two bed house for shared ownership at cost from Adactus HA at The Dog & Partridge, Chorley Lane, Charnock Richard. 11. Performance monitoring 11.1 Balanced Scorecard - to end February 2010 The report of the Operations Director was accepted as presented and the board resolved to note the content of the report. 11.2 Development report The report of the Deputy Group CE/Director of Development was accepted as presented and it was resolved to note the content of the report. 4 11.3 Management Accounts The report of the Group Director of Finance was accepted as presented and it was resolved to note the content of the report. 11.4 Priority Business plan projects progress report The report of the Deputy Group CE/Director of Development was accepted as presented and it was resolved to note the content of the report. 11.5 Staircasing and Resales None to report. 11.6 Leaseholder Fund as at June 2010 In response to a question from a member, the Group Director of Finance confirmed that any monies outstanding from Mountfield Court would be recovered. 12. Any other business None 13. Date of next meeting – 15 November 2010 14. Reports for information 14.1 Regulatory information The report of the Group Director of Corporate Services was accepted as presented and the board resolved to note the content of the report. 14.2 Press Coverage The report of the Deputy Group CE/Group Director of Corporate Services was accepted as presented and it was resolved to note the content of the report. 14.3 Chief Executive’s letters to staff The report of the Deputy Group CE/Group Director of Development was accepted as presented and it was resolved to note the content of the report. 14.4 Review of Regulatory and Statistical Return The report of the Group Director of Corporate Services was accepted as presented and the board resolved to note the content of the report. The meeting closed 5 Report of Meeting Date Item No. H. Roberts Beech Housing Deputy Group CE/Director of Association Board 15 November 2010 4.1 Development GENERAL UPDATE REPORT PURPOSE OF REPORT 1. To provide the Board with a summary of information on issues currently affecting Adactus Housing Association. BACKGROUND Evictions 2. Fourteen evictions have been carried out during the three months ending 30th September 2010. All the evictions were for rent arrears. Neighbourhood Fund 3. The Neighbourhood Fund has been publicised. All key partners, residents groups and social enterprises staff are aware of the fund within our areas of operation. The Fund has generated 75 applications across three local area panels. Initial judging has taken place with residents agreeing which projects to visit, request further information for or eliminate. 4. The second panel meetings are taking place w/c 1st & 8th November with the successful applicants being contacted the following week. Customer Contact Centre 5. The Contact Centre’s performance has remained well above the target level for call response time set by the Board (75% in 15 seconds). External validation of its strong performance has come from two sources: • a benchmarking exercise facilitated by Housemark, involving over 100 contact centres in housing. This showed that current response levels exceed the industry benchmark of 80% in 20 seconds • the repairs market test, which concluded: “we feel it [Contact Centre] compares very well with peer organisations that have a longer established provision.” 6. Other significant developments include: • The launch to AHA and BHA tenants of the new brand for the Contact Centre: ‘Connect’. Two new numbers have been introduced: CallConnect - an 0845 number for land-line callers; MobileConnect - an 0300 number for mobile callers. The two numbers enable all tenants, wherever they live and whatever phone service they use, to have lower call rates. • 17 members of staff have started Chartered Institute of Housing Level 2 training. This will provide staff, many of whom are new to housing, with a stronger formal understanding of the sector as well as an opportunity to gain a qualification. 1 • Progress with resolving more queries at the first point of contact, particularly as a result of close- working with Neighbourhood Officers. Contact Centre staff have undertaken job shadowing and a duty Neighbourhood Officer has been based, for a temporary period, in the Contact Centre. Anti-social behaviour 7. In the three months to the beginning of November 2010, there were 63 live ASB cases. There were six cases in this period where legal action has been taken. Neighbourhood development 8. A great number of activities have been undertaken by Neighbourhood Development Officers (see Appendix 1 for details). Asset Management 9. On September 10th 2010 Connaughts Plc went into administration and ceased to trade. Connaughts Plc were a Partnering Contractor for AHA/ BHA carrying out both bathroom and kitchen refurbishments. The contract that AHA/ BHA had with Connaughts was in its third year of three. 10. Lovell Partnerships Limited (LPL) has since purchased certain sections of Connaught, including the Social Housing Division. Therefore following discussions with the administrators, KPMG, a proposal was put forward to novate the contract from Connaught to LPL. As the contract is nearing its conclusion AHA/ BHA have taken the decision to novate the contract to LPL. 11. The terms of contract following novation are identical to those agreed with Connaught. The rates agreed for bathroom and kitchen refurbishments will remain the same. As a number of staff have been subject to a T.U.P.E. transfer from Connaught the same personnel will be completing the works. Scheme Manager review 12. Following the Group wide review of the sheltered housing service, the new service was implemented week commencing 4th October 2010 across the Group in all areas except Manchester. After initial teething problems it seems to be going well. The new roles of Senior and Support Co-ordinator are proving to be particularly successful as the staff are locally based and can respond quickly where there are issues. 13. All scheme staff have moved onto the new terms and conditions although the Manchester scheme based staff hours haven't changed yet whilst we work through the second consultation with residents. 14. Interviews for the vacant Senior role in Manchester were taking place in late October 2010 and meetings with Manchester residents and councillors were also planned for late October. Remaining scheme based vacancies (other than Manchester) have been advertised externally. Review of social housing regulation 15. On 18 October, the government published the results of its Review of social housing regulation. The headline from this review is that “the Tenant Services Authority (TSA) should be abolished and its economic regulation and backstop consumer regulation functions transferred to the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA)”. No doubt, further information about this and associated matters will be discussed further under agenda item 4.1. RISK ISSUES 16. The issue raised and recommendations made in this report involve risk considerations in the following categories: 2 Financial impact Business interruption Health and safety Reputation and image Asset loss Corporate objectives/performance VALUE FOR MONEY/SUSTAINABILITY/EQUALITY/CONSULTATION IMPLICATIONS 17. None other than previously advised. RECOMMENDATION(S) 18 That the Board notes this report. HILARY ROBERTS DEPUTY GROUP CE/DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT Background papers Review of social housing regulation: http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/housing/socialhousingregulation Report Author Tel Date Doc ID Richard Houghton 01257 244815 3.11.10 BHA report Nov 2010 3 Appendix 1 – Neighbourhood development activity. Sefton • Roots and Shoots launch event - Free event held at Greenacres Nursery which included BBQ/refreshments, planting taster sessions, fire engine display, competitions for kids, welly wanging. • Klondyke clean up day – August, 8 tonnes of rubbish removed from the area. • Stay and Paint – August, painting of hoarding surrounding demolition site with a design measuring over 70 metres. 70 young people involved • Street Cage Soccer, August, sports activities delivered in Klondyke. • Boys bike project – Project delivered in Bootle in partnership with YKids children’s charity. • Roots and Shoots summer planting programme - A number of planting sessions were held at Greenacres Nursery through the summer weeks. • Orrell Community Network Group - Work to bring together key partners in the Orrell/Klondyke area in order to establish regular meetings and to adopt a coordinated approach to community issues. • Neighbourhood Fund Wigan • Ayupp Project: the NDO attended the Fun Day to help promote the service to the 16-25 year olds who live in our Wigan Projects. The NDO arranged a guest speaker to provide a motivational speech to the young people and provided support on the day. • Working with Money Advisers to create script for the “Pounds, Shillings and Sense” DVD to help promote money advice service to new / existing tenants with low literacy skills. • Operation Treacle – Contact made with vulnerable tenants in Wigan & Leigh area with advice given for the Halloween / Bonfire Period. Manchester • Supporting local residents to set up and run a walking club (Moston Marchers) to encourage residents to get together to socialise, keep fit and participate in low-cost activities • Support local residents to turn an overgrown piece of land into a community garden, funds secured via a Green Grant at Grove Lee Garden, Openshaw • Support local residents to improve the communal garden area, funds secured via a Green Grant at Roseleigh Court • Working with local residents to consult users of Vine Street Park in Gorton to submit a funding application to improve the park facilities • Brigham Street Youth Activities: Work with 4CT to deliver youth activities to young people in Openshaw and an intergenerational cooking project • Working with Discuss Youth Inclusion Project and residents from Victoria Court to overturn an area of wasteland into a community garden • Supported the Manchester School of Excellence, a course run over the summer for high achieving pupils from across Manchester to increase confidence and prepare pupils for a working environment. Adactus staff supported sessions about completing application forms, presenting and personal development. • Launched “Our Moss Side” at the Manchester Carnival weekend. 96 promises were made by local people to do something positive for Moss Side 4 • Rubbish Revamped: Roberts Avenue and Playfair Street residents took part in a recycling crafts workshop as a reward for completing a recycling challenge. The streets have doubled the amount of recycling bins used over a 10 week period over the summer. • A consultation was held at Greenheys in Hulme. A BBQ was held and tenants were consulted on paint choices for communal areas. • Planters have now been added to Rawcliffe Street Community Garden. • Adactus supported the Broadfield Park Community Day. We ran crafts sessions and promoted Adactus. • Adactus supported Hulme RESPECT Action Week which involved a programme of activities in partnership with the police to promote community safety. • Launch of RESPECT Action Week: A community event was held in an area that suffers from ASB. Partners were present to promote safety including the Police, Fire Service and ‘Mothers against Violence’ • Bowes Street Community Allotment: Consultation has been carried out with local residents to gage levels of interest in a community allotment. 5 Report of Meeting Date Item No. Hilary Roberts Deputy CE/ Beech Housing 15 November 2010 Group Director of Association Board 4.2 Development COMPREHENSIVE SPENDING REVIEW - MEMBERS BRIEFING PURPOSE OF REPORT 1 To inform the board of the main points arising from the comprehensive spending review which will affect the business. BACKGROUND 2 The government published the comprehensive spending review on 20 October. Housing Benefit changes 3 The following changes to Housing Benefit are proposed which will generate savings totalling £1,820m by 2014/15: Change Date Directly affects Annual saving to introduced government Capping the maximum Local April 2011 Private rented sector £65m by 2014/15 Housing Allowance payable for DWP expects it to affect each property size, and applying just over 14,000 a four-bed limit: households. The vast majority of which are • £250 for one-bed expected to be within • £290 for two-bed London • £340 for three-bed • £400 for four-bed and larger properties Increasing deductions for non- April 2011 Social and private rented £340m by 2014/15 dependents: they will no longer sector be frozen at £7.40 per week for non-earners and will be linked to prices Calculating Local Housing October Private rented sector £425m by 2014/15 Allowance (LHA) rates using the 2011 30th percentile of market rents rather than the 50th percentile Linking LHA increases to the April 2013 Private rented sector £390m by 2014/15 consumer prices index (CPI) which does not include housing costs rather than the higher retail prices index (RPI) Time limiting full HB & LHA April 2013 Social and private rented £110m by 2014/15 payable to people on Job sector Seekers' Allowance (JSA) so that after 12 months HB is reduced by 10% Limiting housing benefit for April 2013 Social rented sector £490m by 2014/15 working age tenants so that it only covers the size of property they are judged to need Increasing non-dependent deductions 4 Tenants will see deductions from their eligible rent where other adults live with the tenant who are not part their family for benefit purposes (typically the claimant's own adult children who are either working or claiming in their own right). This means that tenants sharing their home with other adults will need to collect more money from the other adults to contribute towards the rent, or make up the difference from their own money. The rates of deduction are particularly severe where the adult occupier earns more than £200 per week (nearly everyone in full time work). In many cases the deduction level will be such that it will disqualify the tenant from housing benefit altogether even where the tenant is on a qualifying passport benefit (e.g. income support, pension credit). 5 Possible affect on the association: • Increased demand for independent housing from people who previously shared • Higher incidence of adult children falling out with their parents and being asked to leave the family home • Tenants being less willing to care for their elderly parents in their own home • Increased risk and incidence of slowly increasing arrears • Increased pressure from HB departments on landlords to conduct tenancy audits and notify of changes Reduction in housing benefit to tenants in receipt of Job Seekers' Allowance for more than a year 6 Tenants who have claimed Job Seekers' Allowance for 12 months or more will see their housing benefit reduced by 10 per cent. Tenants who are unable to find work will have to make up the difference from their Job Seekers' Allowance. It is expected that more people will move onto JSA in future years as eligibility for Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) and Incapacity Benefit is restricted. 7 Possible affect on the association: • Increasing financial pressure on tenants, especially in areas where long-term unemployment is higher may lead to increasing arrears. • Higher levels of vacancies due to planned moves and abandonment • Increased incidences of non-dependent deductions and overcrowding as households give up their own tenancy and move in with friends and family • Increased requests for transfer as households seek cheaper properties Limiting housing benefit payable to working age tenants, by property size 8 This change will restrict housing benefit for working age tenants who are occupying a larger social rented property than required for their household size. Tenants may be unable to move to smaller social rented properties if the stock is not available - even if they are willing to - and will be penalised for it. Tenants will be expected to notify changes within the year as household members move out. This is likely to result in an increase in verification checks and housing benefit overpayments. 9 Possible affects on the association: • Higher demand from existing tenants for smaller properties - increased transfer applications and bidding via choice based lettings • Increased risk of increasing arrears and housing benefit overpayments • Increased pressure from HB departments for landlords to conduct tenancy audits and notify of changes A cut in the capital budget for housing of 60% over the next 4 yrs 10 The capital budget has been £8.4bn over the last 3 yrs and will fall to £4.4bn over the next 4 yrs. However the government announced a target of 150,000 new homes, and proposed that in order to develop RSLs increase their rents to 80% market rent on relets and on new developments. A further proposal was that associations could sell vacant stock more freely and reinvest the proceeds. 11 Possible affects on the association: • Reduced development programme • A two-tier lettings system • Increased borrowing requirements • Higher benefit dependency • Increased risk of higher rent arrears on new developments caused by higher rents and restrictions in HB. • New lettings market to households who would previously have been first-time buyers but can no longer obtain a mortgage (eg Manchester CC are considering additional ‘points’ to families on the housing waiting list who are economically active) • Properties which would have a higher sales value are more likely to be in areas of highest housing demand. Next steps 12 Data collection and research is currently underway, and will be reported at the Board Away Day, regarding: • Number of tenants who have been claiming JSA for more than 12 months • How many tenants of working age may be under-occupying • How many tenants already have non-dependent deductions from their benefit • The number and location of stock which becomes vacant in any one year • Comparisons between social rents and market rents in our operational areas • Overall tenant demographics More detailed information about the tenants who have come to us over the 12 months - employment details, wage levels, reason for being housed by us, HB levels. RISK ISSUES 13 The issue raised and recommendations made in this report involve risk considerations in the following categories Financial impact Business interruption Health & Safety Reputation and image Asset loss Corporate objectives/performance 14 The risks are highlighted in the body if the paper VALUE FOR MONEY/SUSTAINABILITY/EQUALITY/CONSULTATION IMPLICATIONS 15 To be researched further and reported at December’s board away day. RECOMMENDATION 16 The board is recommended to note the content of this briefing. HILARY ROBERTS DEPUTY CE/GROUP DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT Report Author Tel Date Doc ID Hilary Roberts 01942 608717 4/11/10 BHA report Nov 2010 Beech Housing Association Ltd. Board papers for agenda items 5.1 to 5.3: Strategic decisions 5.1 Development strategy H. Roberts (enclosed) 5.2 Risk Management Strategy P. Chisnell (enclosed) 5.3 Treasury Management P. Chisnell (confidential) Report of Meeting Date Item No. Hilary Roberts Deputy Group CE/ Beech Housing 15 November 2010 Group Director of Association Board 5.1 Development DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY 2011/12 – 2012/13 PURPOSE OF REPORT 1 To update the current two year development strategy which meets the Group’s goals of expansion, quality and diversity. BACKGROUND 2 The coalition government’s emphasis on decentralisation is resulting in the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) taking more of an enabling role and less of a strategic role. Local Authorities, through Local Enterprise Partnerships, will have a much increased role in deciding which development schemes receive funding. This will require much closer working between authorities, and it will require closer working for RSLs with local authorities. 3 The need to reduce public spending in the comprehensive spending review has led to a 60% reduction in the total social housing grant available: from £8.4bn over the last 3 year period to £4.4bn over the next 4 years. However, the government has also committed to build 150,000 homes, and it is expected that RSLs will charge higher rents (80% of market rent) on new dwellings and relets, to allow this further development with reduced grant. Further detail is awaited on this and on housing benefit restrictions. 4 The strategy therefore must reflect a need to respond to circumstances as they change and the importance of continued links with local authorities, private sector and HCA. A copy of the strategy is attached. RISK ISSUES 5 The issue raised and recommendations made in this report involve risk considerations in the following categories Financial impact Business interruption Health & Safety Reputation and image Asset loss Corporate objectives/performance 6 The primary aim of the development programme is to provide more housing for people in need. However the success of the Group’s development programme is also a primary attraction for other associations seeking mergers and group structures. If the Group was to stop or greatly reduce its development programme, then it would be less likely to be successful in these other growth areas. VALUE FOR MONEY/SUSTAINABILITY/EQUALITY/CONSULTATION IMPLICATIONS 7 All developments have reference to the Regional Housing Strategy and are developed in accordance with the Group’s Sustainability Strategy RECOMMENDATION(S) 8 The board is recommended to resolve to approve the Development Strategy 2011/12 and 2012/13 HILARY ROBERTS DEPUTY GROUP CE/ GROUP DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT Report Author Tel Date Doc ID Hilary Roberts 01942 608717 3/11/10 BHA report Nov 2010 BEECH HOUSING ASSOCIATION DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY 2011/12-2012/13 AIMS Beech Housing Association develops housing, largely on a shared ownership basis for people wishing to become owner-occupiers and for elderly people. HOUSING NEED AND DEMAND The Association will develop in areas where a demand currently exists due to shortages of affordable housing; or in areas where the Adactus Group is involved in the long term creation of sustainable communities in regeneration areas. Bids to the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) will be in line with Local Enterprise Partnership priorities. All schemes will be developed in accordance with the Association’s Marketing Strategy. The current market depression with its lack of mortgage products has negatively affected Beech’s development aspirations, and a prudent approach will be taken to any opportunities. New schemes such as Rent-to- Homebuy and Intermediate Rent, which assist first-time buyers will be considered where there is a demand. Market rent schemes will also be investigated during the year. The Development Department will meet regularly, as necessary, with Local Authorities to discuss local strategy and demand. STRATEGY As Beech HA has limited resources, these will be maximised on areas where, as charitable associations, Adactus HA and Chorley Community Housing would find it difficult to develop. These will typically be shared ownership (or Rent-to-Homebuy) in areas outside of regeneration areas 1. Bids for SHG will be made for those Local Authorities promoting shared ownership/ rent-to- homebuy to create affordable housing - these are rural areas and authorities with affordability problems such as Lancaster, Trafford, and Southport. 2. Section 106 agreements are used by some Local Authorities to ensure that a number of “affordable homes” are included by private developers in larger new build schemes. Beech Housing Association will consider partnering developers to provide this element of their scheme. Funding is provided by discounted land values. 3. Intermediate and market rent schemes are being promoted by the government, and will be considered during the year. 4. Other Equity Investment models are being investigated and opportunities will be reported to board for consideration. Report of Meeting Date Item No. Paul Chisnell Beech Housing 15 November 2010 Group Director of Finance Association Board 5.2 RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGY PURPOSE OF REPORT 1 To approve the 2010 Group risk management strategy and risk register. BACKGROUND 2 The Group risk management strategy is approved annually when the risk register is updated. 3 The Group risk management strategy will be submitted for Group board approval at the end of November and the risk register has been updated for known risks arising in 2009/10. 4 The major risk affecting the organisation and the Group as a whole arise from the recently announced Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR). This is subject to a separate board report and will be discussed further at the Board away day in December. From this any further risks highlighted will be discussed and included on the risk register, together with their impact assessment. 5 The documents to be submitted to Group board are attached for review, comment and/or approval. These include the risk management strategy and risk register. The changes in the risk register are highlighted in yellow and the risk management strategy has not changed as the methodology etc has not changed from 2009. Please note that this is a Group document and clearly some items may be more relevant to other group companies. 6 Board are asked to be aware of the highlighted/updated risks and note the actions/controls in place to mitigate them. RISK ISSUES 7 The issue raised and recommendations made in this report involve risk considerations in the following categories Financial impact Business interruption Health & Safety Reputation and image Asset loss Corporate objectives/performance 8 By their nature, risks affect all aspects of the organisation. The risk management strategy highlights the mitigating controls and therefore the remaining residual effect of the risk management strategy being adopted. With the mitigation in place all accepted risks have become acceptable. RECOMMENDATION 9 It is recommended that the Board approves the revised Group risk management strategy and notes the risk register. Reason for recommendation: To provide an effective framework for the control of risk. PAUL CHISNELL GROUP DIRECTOR OF FINANCE Background papers: none Report Author Tel Date Doc ID Paul Chisnell 01942 608715 13 August 2009 BHA report Nov 2010 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy October 2010 Last updated 12 October 2010 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy 1. Introduction..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Overview.......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 3. Categorising Risk ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 4. Assessing Risks ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 5. Risk Appetite................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 6. Risk Roles and Responsibilities ................................................................................................................................................................. 10 Risk Register, Risk Maps and Project Risk Logs .......................................................................................................................................... 10 Reviewing and Reporting Risks...................................................................................................................................................................... 10 Evaluation of risk.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Addressing Risks ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 14 Risk management – roles and responsibilities ............................................................................................................................................. 14 Board ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 14 Audit Committee........................................................................................................................................................................................... 15 Group Director of Finance ........................................................................................................................................................................... 15 Directors, other managers, project manager............................................................................................................................................. 16 Internal Audit ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 16 Glossary of Key Terms ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 18 October 2010 Page 2 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy 1. Introduction 1.1 There are risks associated with anything new and untried. The Adactus Housing Group (AHG) wants to embrace new opportunities and recognising that, it will rarely be possible to remove risk associated with new opportunities completely. 1.2 AHG’s aim is to identify, manage and minimise, rather than eliminate, risks which may prevent the organisation achieving its objectives. The identification and management of risk is on-going and occurs as changes are made to how the Group operates and to the external environment in which it works. 1.3 This Risk Management Strategy articulates how we mange risk and reflects the evolution of our approach, in line with that of our sector and takes into account the principles outlined in the Housing Corporation’s Risk Management Strategy issued in March 2006. 1.4 Central to AHG’s is its processes and framework for risk management. The Group is committed to embedding risk management throughout the organisation and its systems and controls are designed to ensure that exposure to significant risk is properly managed. The various Boards/Group Board set internal policy on risk and internal control as well as having responsibility for determining the strategic direction and providing oversight of risk management. 1.5 The management of risks is a continuous process that is linked to the Group’s annual business planning cycle and is designed to identify and prioritise the risks to the achievement of policies, aims and objectives. 1.6 This Risk Management strategy outlines in detail the arrangements and processes by which the Group identifies, categorises, assesses and addresses risks. Under it, the key risks facing each part of the group are regularly reviewed and assessed, together with the steps to avoid or mitigate those risks. 1.7 Whilst this strategy document sets out defined processes for managing risk, the Group recognises that successful risk management can only be accomplished on a day-to-day basis by staff at all levels. October 2010 Page 3 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy 2. Overview 2.1 Risk is defined as the uncertainty of outcome, whether positive opportunity or negative threat of action and events. By its nature, risk is necessarily bad. 2.2 Risk has to be assessed in respect of the combination of likelihood of something happening and the impact that arises if it does happen. 2.3 The resources available for managing risk are finite and so it is the aim of the Group to achieve an optimum response to risk and to identify priorities in accordance with our evaluation of the risks. The term ‘risk appetite’ is used to refer to the amount of risk which the organisation is prepared to accept, tolerate, or be exposed to at any point in time. 2.4 Risk Management is the process by which : a. • risks are identified in relation to the achievement of objectives; b. • risks are assessed by reference to their relative likelihood and impact; c. • the identified risks are responded to, taking into account the organisation’s assessment and tolerance; and d. • risks are reviewed and reported – to ensure the risk register is up to date, to gain assurance that responses are effective, and identify when further action is necessary. 2.5 The goals of Risk Management are: a. to take a proactive approach, anticipating and influencing events before they happen; b. to facilitate better informed decision making; and c. to improve contingency planning. 2.6 The management of risk is not a linear process; rather it is the balancing of a number of interwoven elements, which interact with each other. 2.7 The Group’s approach to Risk Management is based around assessment, evaluation, management and measurement, as follows: a. Assess – identify important parts of the business – service, staff, finance b. Evaluate – consider what risks each of these face and are they operational or external. Controlled in a document called the Risk Register. c. Manage – what can we do to minimise the risk d. Measure – score the risk October 2010 Page 4 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy 2.8 It is essential that the risk management process is intertwined with other operating activities and permeates the Group’s management and operations. October 2010 Page 5 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy 3. Categorising Risk 3.1 The risk categories are intended to provide a means of grouping related risks within the risk register document, as risks are commonly not entirely independent from each other. 3.2 The main risk categories are: a. External - arising from the external environment, not wholly within the Group’s control but where action can be taken to mitigate the risk; b. Operational - relating to the successful execution of existing operations – both current delivery and building and maintaining capacity and capability; and c. Change - risks created by decisions to pursue new endeavours beyond current capacity. 3.3 Examples of categories a. External: Political, Economic, Social Cultural, Technological, Legal, Environmental Regulation. b. Operational : Delivery, Capacity, Capability c. Change : New projects, Policies, Change programmes October 2010 Page 6 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy 4. Assessing Risks 4.1 There are three important principles for assessing risks: a. • ensure that there is a clear structure to the process so that both likelihood and impact are considered for each risk; b. • record the assessment of risk in a way which facilitates monitoring and the identification of risk priorities; and c. • be clear about the difference between inherent and residual risk. 4.2 To evaluate risks, all risks should be scored in terms of their likelihood and potential impact using the following scale. 4.3 The score for the likelihood and impact are then multiplied to give an overall risk assessment. Likelihood Impact Score Score 5 Almost Certain 5 Catastrophic 4 Likely 4 Major 3 Possible 3 Moderate 2 Unlikely 2 Minor 1 Rare 1 Insignificant October 2010 Page 7 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy 5. Risk Appetite 5.1 The aim of the Risk Strategy is not to remove all risk but to recognise that some level of risk will always exist. It is recognised that taking risks in a controlled manner is fundamental to innovation and the building of a can do culture which is fundamental to the continued success of the Adactus Group. 5.2 Risk appetite is the amount of risk that the organisation is prepared to accept, tolerate or be exposed to at any point in time. Risk appetite can be expressed as a boundary, above which the orgnaisation will not tolerate the level of risk and further actions must be taken: Impact Severity Impact Assessment of risk multiplier Impact multiplier x Likelihood multiplier (see below) Catastrophic 5 5 10 15 20 25 Major 4 4 8 12 16 20 Moderate 3 3 6 9 12 15 Minor 2 2 4 6 8 10 Insignificant 1 1 2 3 4 5 Multiplier 1 2 3 4 5 Likelihood Rare Unlikely Possibly Likely Almost Certain Key Severe 20- Unacceptable level or risk exposure which requires immediate corrective action to be taken 25 Major 16- Unacceptable level or risk exposure which requires constant active monitoring and measures to be put in place to reduce 20 exposure Moderate 11- Acceptable level or risk exposure subject to regular active monitoring measures 15 Minor 6-10 Acceptable level of risk subject to regular passive monitoring measures Insignificant 1-5 Acceptable level of risk subject to periodic passive monitoring measures. October 2010 Page 8 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy 5.3 The risk appetite is monitored by the inherent and residual risk assessment figures. Generally AHG’s policy is to manage closely all residual risks scoring 16+ and will not wish to tolerate risks scoring 20+. 5.4 The Group’s risk appetite is not necessarily static. The Board may vary the amount of risk which it is prepared to take depending on the circumstances. 5.5 The Board has agreed to focus on monitoring of risks with a score of 16 or more and have delegated to Audit Committee the review and monitoring of the whole register. October 2010 Page 9 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy 6. Risk Roles and Responsibilities 6.1 Responsibility for each risk must be assigned to an owner who is responsible for ensuring the risk is managed and monitored over time. Risk Register, Risk Maps and Project Risk Logs 6.2 The risk register documents the risk assessment in order to: a. facilitate the identification of risk priorities; b. capture the reasons for decision made about what is and is not tolerable exposure; c. record the way in which it is decided to address risk; d. allow all those concerned with risk management to see the overall risk profile and how their areas of particular responsibility fit into it; and e. facilitate the review and monitoring of risks. 6.3 Risk maps display the risks within the risk register to make it easier to assess the relationship of assessed risks to the Groups risk appetite. They can be produced by the Corporate Services Team on request. 6.4 For major change projects, the risks identified, their assessment, the response to each and the risk owner should be documented in the project risk log to support tracking and monitoring. Reviewing and Reporting Risks 6.5 The management of risks has to be reviewed and reported on for two reasons: a. to monitor whether or not the risk profile is changing; and b. to gain assurance that risk management is effective, and to identify when further action is necessary. 6.6 The review process will : a. ensure that all aspects of the risk management process are reviewed at least once a year; b. ensure that risks themselves are subject to review at least quarterly; and c. identify new risks and changes in already identified risks so that the change can be appropriately addressed. October 2010 Page 10 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy 6.7 The Risk Management Strategy will be reviewed once a year, initially by the Senior Team, followed by the Audi Committee. 6.8 The risk register is a live document. Staff and Board members are encouraged to notify the Corporate Services Team at any stage of potential changes to the register. The register will be formally reviewed and updated quarterly by the Senior Team. The updated register will then be reviewed by the Audit and Risk Committee. 6.9 The risk management processes described in this document operates in the context of a wider assurance framework within the Group. 6.10 Each risk is assessed twice. Firstly the ‘INHERENT’ risk which is the exposure arising from a specific risk therefore mitigating action has been take to manage it. 6.11 Secondly the ‘RESIDUAL’ risk which is the exposure arising from a specific risk after action has been taken to manage it and making the assumption that the action is effective. Evaluation of risk 6.12 When evaluating risk, the following criteria need to be considered: a. Financial and value for money issues; b. Human resource issues – capacity, relations and others; c. Service delivery and quality of service issues; d. Public concern, trust or confidence issues; e. Degree and nature of risks to the public; f. Reversibility or otherwise of realisation of risks; g. The impact of the risk on the Group (including its reputation), stakeholders and the public; and h. Defensibility of realisation of the risk 6.13 The impact descriptors are only an indication of the probable effect on the Housing Group if the risk occurs; they are not hard and fast rules. It is essential that staff use their knowledge and judgement when deciding on the score for impact. 6.14 In particular when assessing financial impact staff and Board members should take account of the potential cumulative effect of what might be considered smaller sums on the overall resource constraints of the organisation. October 2010 Page 11 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy 6.15 A summary of the likelihood descriptors is as follows: Almost certain: Likelihood greater than 75% Very likely The event is expected to occur in most circumstances There could be a history of regular occurrences, i.e. on an annual basis; and If new event, likelihood of occurrence regarded as almost in evitable Likely: Likelihood greater than 50% There is a strong possibility the event or risk will occur There may be a history of frequent occurrences Everyone with knowledge of issues in this area knows this could happen No or little effective measures to reduce likelihood can be and /or have been taken; and Will probably occur in most circumstances Possible; Likelihood between 10% and 50% The event might occur at some time There could be a history of casual occurrence Most of the team know that the risk might occur; and Measures that reduce likelihood have been taken but are not fully effective Unlikely: Likelihood between 1% and 10% Not expected, but there’s a slight possibility it could occur at some time Some of the team consider this a risk that might occur Conditions exist for this loss to occur; and Probably requires more than two coincident events Rare: Likelihood less than 1% likelihood Highly unlikely, but may occur in exceptional circumstances It could happen, but probably never will No experience of a similar failure Probably requires three or more coincident events; and • If it has happened, sufficient controls now in place October 2010 Page 12 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy Impact Descriptors Description Financial Impact Health & Safety Asset Loss Business Reputation and Corporate Intervention Interruption image Objectives/Performance Insignificant 0.5% of either a No or only minor Little or no Interruption Minor article in local Workaround required, Relevant Capital or Revenue personal injury. First impact on negligible; less media or lobby group within Group resources, to Manager Budget. Aid needed, but no assets than ½ day. website (story deliver objective. Up to 5% Intervenes days lost Critical systems unsubstantiated) variation in achievement of unavailable for corporate targets. less than one hour Minor 2.5% of only either a Minor injury, medical Minor loss or Interruption Headline article in local Additional resources Assistant Capital or Revenue treatment and some damage to inconvenient; ½ media or housing requiring Senior Team Director Budget. days lost assets -1 day. Critical press, minor article in authorisation or delay in Intervenes. systems national media achieving part of objective unavailable for (Substantiated story) Minor shortfall in several several hours categories or major shortfall in one category 5 – 10 % variation in achievement of corporate targets Moderate 5% of only either a Serious Medical Major Interruption 1 Headline article in Major compromise in Director Capital or Revenue treatment damage to day – 1 week national media (story objectives. Major shortfall Intervenes Budget. hospitalisation and assets Client substantiated and in several categories 10 – numerous days lost dissatisfaction; publicly embarrassing) 25% variation in Critical systems achievement of corporate unavailable for targets up to 1 day Major 10% of only either a Single death or Significant 1 week – 1 Short term campaign in Elements of objective Chief Capital or Revenue extensive injuries or loss of assets month Critical national media (story abandoned fail to meet Executive Budget. long term illness systems substantiated, publicly needs of a housing need intervenes unavailable for embarrassing with third category 25 – 50% 1 day or a party actions) variation in achievement of series of corporate targets prolonged outages. Catastrophic 20% of only either a Multiple deaths or Complete Interruption Prolonged national Unable to deliver objective Board Capital or Revenue severe permanent loss of assets more than 1 media campaign or Widespread failure to meet intervenes Budget. disabilities month. Critical lobby group campaign housing needs more than systems Story substantiated, 50% variation in unavailable for publicly achievement of corporate more than a embarrassment, with targets day (at a third party action and crucial time) widespread news profile October 2010 Page 13 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy Addressing Risks 6.16 The purpose of addressing risks is to turn uncertainty to the Group’s benefit by constraining threats and taking advantage of opportunities. 6.17 The appropriate response to each risk will depend on its nature and the outcome of the risk assessment. 6.18 There are five key aspects of addressing risks: TOLERATE : The exposure may be tolerable without any further action being taken. Even if it is not tolerable, the ability to do anything about some risks may be limited, or the cost of taken such action may be disproportional to the potential benefit gained. In these cases the response may be to tolerate the existing level of risk. TREAT: by far the greatest number of risks will be addressed in this way. The purpose of treatment is that whilst continuing within the Group with the activity giving rise to risk, action (control) is taken to constrain the risk to an acceptable level. TRANSFER: for some risks the best response may be to transfer them. This might be done by conventional insurance, or it might be done by paying a third party to take the risk in another way. This option is particularly good for mitigating financial risks to assets. TERMINATE: some risks will only be treatable, or confinable to acceptable levels, by terminating the activities. TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY: his option is not an alternative to those above: rather it is an option which should be considered whenever tolerating, transferring or treating a risk. Risk management – roles and responsibilities Board 6.19 The Board has responsibility for ensuring that the Group fulfils the aims and objectives and for promoting the efficient and effective use of staff and other resources by the Group. Version 13/April 2009 Page 14 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy 6.20 The Board shall demonstrate high standards of corporate governance at all times, including using Audit Committee to help the Board to address the key financial and other risks facing the Group. 6.21 Only risks with a residual level of 16 or more on the register are submitted to the board. Audit Committee 6.22 The Audit Committee is responsible for ensuring proper arrangements exist for risk management and internal control. It considers and advises the Board on: a. The strategic processes and policies for risk, control and governance and Statement of Internal Control, prior to endorsement by the Board; b. The promotion, co-ordination and monitoring of risk management activities, including regular review and input to the corporate risk profile; and c. Assurances relating to the adequacy and governance processes for the organisation, with particular reference to the management of key risks to the achievement of objectives and targets. 6.23 The Audit Committee will be provided with: a. A report summarising and significant changes to the Group’s Risk Register for each meeting; and b. The Group’s Risk Management Strategy, Risk Register and Annual Risk Map and proposals for continuous improvement of the risk management process and culture as appropriate. Group Director of Finance 6.24 In managing risk the Group Director of Finance is responsible for ensuring that: a. A system of risk management is maintained to inform decisions on financial and operational planning and to assist in achieving objectives and targets; b. The Board are involved in the risk management system; and c. A Risk Register. 6.25 This includes: a. Setting and communicating the risk management strategy; b. Providing leadership and direction over the risk register; and c. Conducting an annual review of the effectiveness of the system of internal control in support of the Statement Internal Control. Version 13/April 2009 Page 15 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy 6.26 The Group Director of Finance will coordinate the risk management in establishing effective risk management in their areas of responsibility. 6.27 The Group Director of Finance is responsible for developing and implementing the process and maintaining the risk register document. 6.28 The Finance team will facilitate discussion of risk with local and cross functional management teams as an integral part of the Business plan process. Directors, other managers, project manager 6.29 Everyone with a line or project management role is responsible for assessing and communicating risks within their sphere of responsibility, including judging when a risk should considered for inclusion in the corporate risk register or project risk log. Risk Owners 6.30 Risk owners are responsible for ensuring that each risk assigned to her/him is managed and monitored over time. All staff 6.31 Whilst this strategy document sets out defined processes for managing risk, successful risk management can only be accomplished on a day-to-day basis by staff. 6.32 At all levels through their working practices; it does not simply lie inert in corporate policies and management structures. Risk management is part of every member of staff’s responsibilities and virtually everyone has a role in carrying out appropriate risk management by supporting risk identification and assessment, and designing and implementing risk responses. This will be achieved through core briefings, team meetings and one to one sessions, etc. Internal Audit 6.33 Internal Audit plays a key role in evaluation the effectiveness of, and recommending improvements to, the risk management process. This is based on the systematic review and evaluation of the policies, procedures and operations in place to: a. establish and monitor the achievement of the organisation’s objectives; b. identify, assess and manage the risks to achieving the organisation’s objectives; Version 13/April 2009 Page 16 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy c. advise on, formulate, and evaluate policy; d. ensure the economical, effective and efficient use of resources; e. ensure compliance with established policies (including behavioural and ethical expectations), procedures, laws and regulations; f. safeguard the organisation’s assets and interests from losses of all kings, including fraud, irregularity or corruption; and g. ensure the integrity and reliability of information, accounts and data, including internal and external reporting and accountability processes. 6.34 In addition, Internal Audit aims to add value through: a. supporting and facilitating the identification of risks and the development of processes and procedures to assess and effectively respond to risks; b. the identification and recommendation of potential process improvements; c. the provision of advice to manage risks in developing systems, processes, projects and procedures and d. the provision of best practice advice to all sections of the Corporation; and encouraging best practice and engendering continuous improvement. Version 13/April 2009 Page 17 Adactus Housing Group Limited Risk Management Strategy Glossary of Key Terms Assurance An evaluated opinion, based on evidence gained from review, on the organisation’s governance, risk management and internal control framework. Exposure The consequences, as a combination of impact and likelihood, which may be experienced by the organisation if a specific risks realised. Impact The probable effect on the organisation if the risk occurs Inherent risk The exposure arising from a specific risk before any action has been taken to manage it. Likelihood The probability or chance of the risk occurring Residual risk The exposure arising from a specific risk after action has been taken to manage it and making the assumption that the action is effective. Risk Uncertainty of outcome, whether positive opportunity or negative threat, of action and events. It is the combination of likelihood and impact. Risk appetite The amount of risk that an organisation is prepared to accept, tolerate, or be exposed to at any point in time. Risk assessment The evaluation of risk with regard to the impact if the risk is realised, and the likelihood of the risk being realised Risk Management All the processes involved identifying, assessing and judging risks, assigning ownership, taking actions to mitigate or anticipate them, and monitoring and reviewing progress. Risk Register The documented and prioritised overall assessment of the range of specific risks faced by the Corporation. Version 13/April 2009 Page 18 Printed on: 09/11/2010 file ref: H:\My Documents\Board meetings\Beech\Beech Board\2010\15 Nov\Dropbox\risk register Nov 2010 Adactus Housing Group Risk Register Risk Inherent Assessment Residual Assessment Action No Category Risk Description L I L*I Controls In Place L I L*I Planned Owner Objective Q1: Provide effective, customer focused services Q1.1 Operational Poor customer satisfaction 2 4 8 Regular customer satisfaction surveys. Annual 1 2 2 Treat GDCS results leading to lack of resident away days held. Adactus 500 being demand established to improve quality of market intelligence received from a wider population of residents. Q1.2 Operational Tenants dissatisfied with 3 2 6 Pre and post inspection of repairs. Maintenance 1 2 2 Treat DirAM maintenance services policies and procedures. Tenant surveys Q1.3 Operational Failure to identify the 2 3 6 Regular customer satisfaction surveys. Regular 1 3 3 Treat GDCS needs of our customers tenant forums / away days held. Q1.4 Operational Failure to deliver service 3 4 12 Ongoing review with quarterly reports to Board on 1 4 4 Tolerate DO (CCH) improvements to tenants stock transfer progress contained within the CCH offer document Q1.5 Operational Technical problem causes 2 4 8 Phone calls revert to local offices. 2 3 6 Treat ODCS interruption to Contact Centre service Q1.6 Operational Poor quality of service 4 1 4 on the job' training of CC staff. Knowledgebase for 2 1 2 Treat ODCS delivered by Contact handling queries. Call monitoring by managers. Centre CIH Level 2 training for staff new to housing. Develop satisfaction monitoring. Q1.7 Operational Insufficient Contact Centre 2 2 4 Staff complement is set at level to take calls and 1 2 2 Treat ODCS staff to provide required carry out admin, so can prioritise call handling if service levels (sickness, fewer staff available. TH based staff to be rained bad weather) to take 'switchboard' calls; prepare for 'bad weather' type calls Q1.8 Operational Failure of company's IT 2 5 10 IT security and system resilience measures. 2 4 8 Treat ODCS network Disaster Recovery contract. Q1.9 External Failure of public data 2 5 10 Company has two separate connections to the 2 3 6 Treat ODCS network used by company public network. Business Continuity Plan Q1.10 Operational Failure to take into 3 4 12 Resident Involvement Team in place and operating 2 3 6 Treat GDCS account the representative a 'menu of involvement'. All reports to board views of customers in required to evidence consultation. Adactus 500 decision making development Q1.11 Operational Unable to deliver effective 3 4 12 Resident Involvement framework reviewed and new 2 4 8 Treat GDCS co-regulation structure implemented L Likelihood 5 Almost Certain 4 Likely 3 Possible 2 Unlikely 1 Rare I Impact 5 Catastrophic 4 Major 3 Moderate 2 Minor 1 Insignificant Printed on: 09/11/2010 file ref: H:\My Documents\Board meetings\Beech\Beech Board\2010\15 Nov\Dropbox\risk register Nov 2010 Adactus Housing Group Risk Register Risk Inherent Assessment Residual Assessment Action No Category Risk Description L I L*I Controls In Place L I L*I Planned Owner Objective Q2: Run an efficient business, controlling costs and make the best use of efficiency savings Q2.1 Operational Overstretched / stressed 4 4 16 Maintain good terms and conditions. Regular 2 4 8 Treat GCE staff review of workloads and assessment of capacity and resources. Q2.2 External Inability to recruit the best 3 4 12 Maintain image through marketing effort. Write 2 4 8 Treat GDCE staff articles of new recruits for press. Maintain good terms and conditions and benefits Q2.3 External Repairs and Maintenance 3 4 12 Maintain good terms and conditions. Regular 2 4 8 Treat DirAM Staff Skills Shortage review of workloads and assessment of capacity and resources. Succession planning for apprentices Q2.4 External Inability to retain good 2 4 8 Maintain good terms and conditions. Regular 2 4 8 Treat GDCE staff review of recruitment process to ensure it is effective. Annual staff survey through Best Companies methodology. Re-structured HR team with greater expertise. Q2.5 Operational Loss of key member of 2 4 8 Maintain good terms and conditions. Regular 2 4 8 Treat GCE staff review of workloads and assessment of capacity and resources. Succession planning Q2.6 Operational Loss of staff through 3 4 12 Disaster recovery plan in place 1 4 4 Tolerate GCE external pandemics e.g. swine flu Q2.7 Operational Staff in position who are 2 4 8 Maintain good terms and conditions. Regular 1 4 4 Tolerate DirDevHR not motivated and trained review of recruitment process to ensure it is effective. Annual staff survey on satisfaction. Comprehensive training plan. Q2.8 Operational Staff are not trained 2 2 4 Commitment to training. GCE ongoing manager 1 2 2 Tolerate GDCE effectively leading to poor training being held. Regular 1-1s held with all staff performance in services and annual PPRs carried out. Training needs assessment carried out via PPRs. Annual training budget Q2.9 Operational Poor performance in one 3 4 12 SMT and Boards regularly review performance 2 4 8 Treat and All part of Group impairs indicators for each group company tolerate regulators' assessments of the whole Group Q2.10 Operational Material fraudulent activity 2 4 8 Contract tendering and letting procedures. 1 4 4 Transfer GDF/DirAM takes place Approved contactor list. Segregation of authorisation and raising works orders. Competitive tendering limits. Post inspection or confirmation of work completed. Q2.11 External Adverse report from the 2 4 8 Dedicated team to meeting the needs and 1 4 4 Treat and GDCE housing regulator demands of our regulators. Maintain good Tolerate relationship with our regulators. Q2.12 External AHA does not deliver on 2 4 8 Action plan agreed with operational managers and 1 4 4 Treat and GDCS agreed AC action plan directors and managed through Clearview software. Tolerate L Likelihood 5 Almost Certain 4 Likely 3 Possible 2 Unlikely 1 Rare I Impact 5 Catastrophic 4 Major 3 Moderate 2 Minor 1 Insignificant Printed on: 09/11/2010 file ref: H:\My Documents\Board meetings\Beech\Beech Board\2010\15 Nov\Dropbox\risk register Nov 2010 Adactus Housing Group Risk Register Risk Inherent Assessment Residual Assessment Action No Category Risk Description L I L*I Controls In Place L I L*I Planned Owner Q2.13 External Interest rates rise leading 5 5 25 80% of debt is on fixed interest rates. Advice 5 2 10 Treat and GDF to breach of covenants obtained from external advisors. External Tolerate information on short and long term interest rates, obtained on a regular basis. Sufficient facilities are in place for the next 3 years. Q2.14 Operational Insufficient funds caused 5 3 15 ongoing security being charged to support cashflow 2 3 6 Treat ODF by lack of security charged sufficient for 2010/2011. Security database now to banks restricting draw targeted as a standalone project and will be in in downs against facilities place by Q2 2011 to support 2012 onwards available Q2.15 Operational Failure to meet financial 3 4 12 Regular performance management reporting to the 2 4 8 Treat GDF covenants Board and Treasury reports to Board Q2.16 External Breach of transfer contract 3 4 12 Quarterly monitoring meetings to take place with 2 4 8 Treat and GCE the council as contained in the contract. Tolerate Q2.17 External Fails to perform against 3 4 12 Monitoring meetings with the Council take place 2 4 8 Treat GCE various Council's SLA's quarterly. Regular performance monitoring Q2.18 Operational IT failure leads to 2 4 8 Disaster recovery plan in place. Data backed up 2 4 8 Treat and GDCS breakdown in service regularly and stored in a fireproof safe off site. tolerate delivery New contingency arrangements in place if network connection to satellite offices fails. Q2.20 Operational Staff injured/killed in the 2 5 10 Competent health and safety person in place who 1 5 5 Treat and DirAM course of their duties understands all the relevant legislation and has Transfer ensured health and safety assessments have been carried out. Q2.21 External Natural disaster at office 2 4 8 Competent health and safety person in place who 1 4 4 Treat and DirAM destroys understands all the relevant legislation and has Transfer records/equipment leading ensured fire risk assessments etc have been to loss of service carried out. Q2.22 Operational Poor performance on the 2 4 8 Continuous review of performance, prudent budget 1 4 4 Treat and DirAM Miles Platting PFI leads to set for deductions tolerate higher financial deductions than expected Q2.23 External Building cost inflation 3 4 12 Monitor closely. Safeguarded somewhat by in 3 1 3 Treat and GDF increases house team. Prudent assumptions in business Tolerate plan. Q2.24 Operational Rent arrears are not 3 3 9 Dedicated resources and procedures for chasing 1 3 3 Treat GDF chased effectively leading rent arrears. Implement Arrears Pilot. to loss of income Q2.25 External Shared Owners enter into 5 4 20 All shared owners have been contacted recently to 5 2 10 Treat and GDF/GDCE mortgage arrears resulting encourage them to engage with us if they have Tolerate in increased financial issues with a view to preventing repossessions repossessions via our flexible tenure policy. Retained and mainstreamed Financial Inclusion Officer for Beech and across rest of Group. Group Worklessness Strategy will impact if effect due to job loss. Q2.26 External Costs increase beyond 2 3 6 Regular benchmarking carried out. Monthly 1 3 3 Treat GDF that budgeted leading to management accounts reviewed by senior team. worsening efficiency Zero based budgeting introduced 20 L Likelihood 5 Almost Certain 4 Likely 3 Possible 2 Unlikely 1 Rare I Impact 5 Catastrophic 4 Major 3 Moderate 2 Minor 1 Insignificant Printed on: 09/11/2010 file ref: H:\My Documents\Board meetings\Beech\Beech Board\2010\15 Nov\Dropbox\risk register Nov 2010 Adactus Housing Group Risk Register Risk Inherent Assessment Residual Assessment Action No Category Risk Description L I L*I Controls In Place L I L*I Planned Owner Q2.27 External Sept RPI falls below 3 4 12 Impact mitigated by Target Rent Convergence 3 3 9 Treat and GDF business plan assumption, formula (RPI + 1/2% + £2). Reforecast to be Tolerate implying budgeted income implemented in Oct for budget setting round not being achieved leading to a negative impact on the Group financial position. Q2.28 External The Group fails to realise 3 3 9 Budgets to be set EXCLUDING sales revenue 3 1 3 Tolerate GDF previously anticipated property sales surpluses leading to a tightening financial position. Q2.29 Operational Financial viability in the 2 5 10 Efficiency savings for 2009/10 identified and locked 1 5 5 Tolerate GDF long term is reduced into operational budgets. Close budget monitoring through a failure to deliver to continue in 2009/10. Continued Improvement efficiency savings, Plans underway and process review. Rigorous breaches of loan investment appraisal undertaken and close covenants or through poor monitoring of financial covenants in place. investment decisions. Q2.30 External The Group faces an 3 4 12 Significant undrawn facilities in place. Housing 3 3 9 Treat and GDF inability to secure future stock audit underway to identify available security Tolerate financing on attractive across the Group. Possible intragroup lending terms as existing funders available. Development programme could be leave the market or reach mothballed. The Group is continuing to maintain saturation point. and develop relationships with key funders and explore alternative funding sources and options. Q2.31 External Growing inflationary 3 2 6 Increasing inflation is beneficial to the financial 2 1 2 Treat and GDF pressures plan. However in a period of growing inflation it is Tolerate vital to manage costs through good budgetary control Q2.32 External In the current financial 5 3 15 There are strong financial inclusion, debt recovery 3 2 6 Treat and GCE climate the organisation and early intervention policies in place throughout Tolerate runs the risk of increasing the group to recognise those most at threat of its bad debts running up arrears and bad debts. Q2.33 Operational Budget overspends effect 3 4 12 Cash flow monitored closely and reviewed by 1 4 4 Treat GDF the delivery of the senior team. Focus on budgetary controls and development programme overspends not allowed unless funded from underspends elsewhere Q2.34 External Changes in HB and other 4 5 20 Rent policy designed to ensure affordability and 2 5 10 Tolerate GCE/GDCE/ Government legislation effectiveness. Close relationship with LA. Proper GDCS/GDF impacts on financial budgetary controls in place. Ongoing reshaping of resources organisation to fit constraints Q2.35 Operational Increase in void units 3 3 9 Monitor trends in voids and report to Board. 1 3 3 Treat DirAM leading to significant loss Action taken when issue arises. of income Q2.36 Operational Staff are not trained 2 3 6 Regular staff training in place 1 3 3 Treat DirDevHR effectively leading to poor performance in services L Likelihood 5 Almost Certain 4 Likely 3 Possible 2 Unlikely 1 Rare I Impact 5 Catastrophic 4 Major 3 Moderate 2 Minor 1 Insignificant Printed on: 09/11/2010 file ref: H:\My Documents\Board meetings\Beech\Beech Board\2010\15 Nov\Dropbox\risk register Nov 2010 Adactus Housing Group Risk Register Risk Inherent Assessment Residual Assessment Action No Category Risk Description L I L*I Controls In Place L I L*I Planned Owner Q2.37 Operational Increase in inappropriate 2 3 6 All properties are let on a starter tenancy basis. 1 3 3 Treat DirAM lettings leading to increase Lettings policy review to ensure goof practice nuisance problems and across all LA's. increased costs Q2.38 Operational Statutory housing 2 5 10 The condition of our stock has been recently 1 5 5 Treat DirAM obligations not met leading surveyed for compliance with our statutory to prosecution obligations through the Stock Condition process. The maintenance service regularly updates it's performance to include new regulations and legislation. Q2.39 Operational Inadequate maintenance 2 4 8 The Asset Database is constantly updated to 1 4 4 Treat DirAM leads to properties record the current condition of our properties. This dilapidating which leads to information is then fed into the Asset Strategy higher costs in the long Model to give an informed view of not only their term and reduced demand condition but their overall viability. Regular maintenance reviews, tenant satisfaction surveys and performance monitoring assist in delivering a consistent maintenance service. Q2.40 Operational inadequate funding of 2 4 8 5 and 30 year business plan in place based on the 1 4 4 Treat GDF major repairs requirement stock condition survey and information gathered in house Q2.41 Operational CCH Refurb partner 3 3 9 Contract monitored through monthly meetings. 1 4 4 Treat DO (CCH) underperforms or delivers Specialist consultants supporting AHG and CCH poor customer service staff Q2.42 Operational Failure to meet the Decent 2 4 8 Information gathered from the comprehensive 1 4 4 Treat DirAM Homes Standard stock condition survey is fed through the asset database to accurately predict and model our maintenance to meet the Decent Homes Standard. Q2.43 Operational Properties taken out of the 3 3 9 Housing management carry out routine 6 monthly 1 2 2 Treat DO (CCH) debit are routinely checked checks to ensure the properties are unoccupied. to ensure no malpractise Q2.44 Operational Failure to tackle ASB 3 5 15 Group ASB team handles serious cases. NSMs 2 4 8 Treat GDCS effectively and promptly monitor work of NOs in dealing with low level cases. Introduce REACT. Assess performance against targets and against performance by other RSLs Q2.45 External Increasing political 3 5 15 Communications officer in CCH staffing structure. 1 5 5 Transfer GDCE sensitivity of our work PR agency in place for rest of Group to moderate leads to poor publicity impact of poor publicity generated by politicians or other external parties L Likelihood 5 Almost Certain 4 Likely 3 Possible 2 Unlikely 1 Rare I Impact 5 Catastrophic 4 Major 3 Moderate 2 Minor 1 Insignificant Printed on: 09/11/2010 file ref: H:\My Documents\Board meetings\Beech\Beech Board\2010\15 Nov\Dropbox\risk register Nov 2010 Adactus Housing Group Risk Register Risk Inherent Assessment Residual Assessment Action No Category Risk Description L I L*I Controls In Place L I L*I Planned Owner Q2.46 External Downturn in housing 5 4 20 Demand monitoring and market assessments prior 3 3 9 Treat and GDCE market reduces sale price to commencement of development in any location. Tolerate of shared ownership Directors considering the current portfolio on a properties and/ or inability scheme by scheme basis to assess the most to sell appropriate action. Extensive sensitivity testing of business plans taking place. Sales incentives being considered on a sale by sale basis. Building relationships with banks to encourage availability of shared ownership products. Business plans/budgets prepared not based upon property sales. Q2.47 Operational Fraud committed by 1 2 2 All phone payments handled by Callpay. 0 2 0 Tolerate ODCS Contact Centre staff against tenants Q2.48 Operational Breach of Data Protection 2 2 4 IT security policy, including use of thin-client 1 2 2 Tolerate ODCS Act - personal data mislaid devices and limited use of mobile IT devices that or misused can store data Q2.49 External Media story damaging 3 4 12 Issues management contract in place with PR 1 4 4 Tolerate ODCS company's reputation Agency. Q2.50 Operational Inaccurate performance 2 4 8 Automation of KPI production. Internal Affairs team 1 3 3 Tolerate ODCS data leads to damaging carrying out sense-checks. decisions being made Q2.51 Operational Failure to meet regulator's 2 4 8 Monitor changes in regulatory regime. Report to 1 3 3 Tolerate GDCS requirements Group Board on fulfilling of requirements Q2.52 External Changes to regulation 4 3 12 Employ staff to engage with regulators to obtain 4 1 4 Tolerate GDCS following HCA/TSA insight into potential changes and react accordingly merging and advise Group L Likelihood 5 Almost Certain 4 Likely 3 Possible 2 Unlikely 1 Rare I Impact 5 Catastrophic 4 Major 3 Moderate 2 Minor 1 Insignificant Printed on: 09/11/2010 file ref: H:\My Documents\Board meetings\Beech\Beech Board\2010\15 Nov\Dropbox\risk register Nov 2010 Adactus Housing Group Risk Register Risk Inherent Assessment Residual Assessment Action No Category Risk Description L I L*I Controls In Place L I L*I Planned Owner Objective E1: Increase the size of the business through new group members, transfer or development E1.1 Operational Budget overspends lead to 2 5 10 Regular benchmarking carried out. Monthly 1 5 5 Treat GDF damaging the management accounts reviewed by senior team sustainability of the business E1.2 External Opportunities for business 3 4 12 Specific business expansion manager in place 1 4 4 Treat and Take GCE growth missed due to The concentration on existing Opportunity projects E1.3 Operational New initiatives not viable 3 4 12 Assessment including the board of the strategic fit 1 4 4 Treat and Take GCE of the opportunity. Evaluation of the management The resources required to bid for the opportunity and an Opportunity upfront assessment of the chances of success. Financial and operational assessment of new venture including risk assessment and identification of skill and resource requirements E1.4 External Not finding other 2 2 4 Potential merger partners are carefully selected. 2 1 2 Treat and Take GCE Associations to join the However the financial strength of the group is The Group and that time will be robust, therefore seeking a partner is not Opportunity spent pursuing imperative to enable Adactus to continue growing unsuccessful merger in its own right partners with maybe adverse publicity E1.5 External Land / property not 3 3 9 Bought as it becomes available and develop a 2 3 6 Treat and GDCE available as anticipated reserve pipeline of replacement sites / schemes tolerate E1.6 External Government budget 4 4 16 Continued investigation of new funding initiative 3 3 9 Treat and GDCE cuts/policy lead to reduced scheme types tolerate SHG, leading to loss of grant income E1.7 Operational Risk that development 3 4 12 Schemes considered in line with development 1 4 4 Treat and GDCE schemes are not viable strategy. Feasibility study for each scheme using tolerate standard assumptions and criteria. Assessment of present and expected tenant requirements including lettability. Scheme break even criteria. Standard scheme approval procedures. E1.8 Operational Failure to achieve Housing 3 4 12 Development teams review progress weekly, 1 4 4 Treat and DirDevHR Corporation targets update Gantt charts, monitored by Operations tolerate Director weekly. E1.9 External Property and land values 2 4 8 Area based development teams with local 1 4 4 Treat and DirDevHR increase significantly knowledge of land market tolerate E1.10 External Development contactor 3 3 9 Stringent financial checks at selection point. Devpt 1 3 3 Treat DirDevHR goes bankrupt staff aware of warning signs on site. E1.11 External Competition for funds/new 3 3 9 Assessment including the board of the strategic fit 1 3 3 Treat and Take GCE initiative too high of the opportunity. Evaluation of the management The resources required to bid for the opportunity and an Opportunity upfront assessment of the chances of success. Financial and operational assessment of new venture including risk assessment and identification of skill and resource requirements L Likelihood 5 Almost Certain 4 Likely 3 Possible 2 Unlikely 1 Rare I Impact 5 Catastrophic 4 Major 3 Moderate 2 Minor 1 Insignificant Printed on: 09/11/2010 file ref: H:\My Documents\Board meetings\Beech\Beech Board\2010\15 Nov\Dropbox\risk register Nov 2010 Adactus Housing Group Risk Register Risk Inherent Assessment Residual Assessment Action No Category Risk Description L I L*I Controls In Place L I L*I Planned Owner Objective D1: Provide targeted neighbourhood investment D1.1 Operational Concentrate only on 2 3 6 Neighbourhood Development Officer in CCH 1 3 3 Treat GCE/GDCE tenants without structure. Regeneration Framework in place. considering Asset Management strategy in place. neighbourhood needs and Neighbourhood fund established across Group the bigger picture D1.2 Operational Misuse of Neighbourhood 2 3 6 NDO/NO in place to act as "filter" to Dragons' Den 1 3 3 Tolerate and DO Fund, abuse through non panel. Report to Board at six and twelve months. Treat (CCH)/GDCE declared conflicts of Part of process is for Dragons to declare conflicts interest of interest. L Likelihood 5 Almost Certain 4 Likely 3 Possible 2 Unlikely 1 Rare I Impact 5 Catastrophic 4 Major 3 Moderate 2 Minor 1 Insignificant Printed on: 09/11/2010 file ref: H:\My Documents\Board meetings\Beech\Beech Board\2010\15 Nov\Dropbox\risk register Nov 2010 Adactus Housing Group Risk Register Risk Inherent Assessment Residual Assessment Action No Category Risk Description L I L*I Controls In Place L I L*I Planned Owner Objective D2: Provide choice and services that are sensitive to the diverse needs of our customers D2.1 Operational Failure to diversify our 3 2 6 Consideration always given to diversity needs in 1 2 2 Treat GDCE staffing and management recruitment process. E&D training programme for to reflect the community all staff implemented composition D2.2 Operational Board members have 3 4 12 Board recruitment, assessment and training policy 1 4 4 Treat GDCS insufficient skills to in place undertake role D2.3 External Benefits indexation linked 4 3 12 close monitoring of arrears and early actions via 2 3 6 Tolerate GDF to CPI rather than RPI automated arrears process leading to tenant hardship as benefits and rent indexation out of sync D2.4 External Reduction is Supporting 4 4 16 Exit strategy to be determined if funding no longer 2 4 8 Treat and GCE/GDF People funding available tolerate D2.5 Operational Fall foul of Equality Act 3 5 15 Equality and diversity policy updated annually and 2 5 10 Treat and GDCS 2010 programme of staff training implemented. tolerate Undertook independent assessment against Equality Framework for Local Government (AHA) to achieve level 3 by 2015. to be rolled out to rest of group. L Likelihood 5 Almost Certain 4 Likely 3 Possible 2 Unlikely 1 Rare I Impact 5 Catastrophic 4 Major 3 Moderate 2 Minor 1 Insignificant Beech Housing Association Ltd. Board papers for agenda items 6.1 to 6.3: Policy and Framework decisions: 6.1 Equality & Diversity Policy B. Moran (enclosed) 6.2 Resident Involvement Framework B. Moran (enclosed) 6.3 Designated Reserves Policy P. Chisnell (confidential) Report of Meeting Date Item No. Brian Moran Group Director of Corporate Adactus Housing 15 November 2010 Services Association Board 6.1 EQUALITY & DIVERSITY POLICY PURPOSE OF REPORT 1 To seek board endorsement of revisions to the Group Equality & Diversity Policy. BACKGROUND 2 The Association has previously adopted the Group Equality & Diversity Policy. The policy is timetabled for review and a revised version is presented for consideration at Appendix 1. 3 A summary of the changes proposed is presented at Appendix 2. The changes are minor in nature. RISK ISSUES 4 The issue raised and recommendations made in this report involve risk considerations in the following categories 5 Financial impact Business interruption Health & Safety Reputation and image Asset loss Corporate objectives/performance 6 The policy has been reviewed to account for the changes introduced by the Equality Act 2010. A failure to comply with this new legislation would realise wide-ranging risks to the Association, including the prospect of unlimited financial fines should unlawful discrimination be proven. VALUE FOR MONEY/SUSTAINABILITY/EQUALITY/CONSULTATION IMPLICATIONS 7 An equality impact assessment has been undertaken using the Joseph Rowntree Foundation online tool. The assessment is positive with the main driver for this being the promotion of access to public and private services. 8 The revised policy draws on the results of resident consultation with respect to a new approach to Equality Impact Assessments and the prioritisation of responsive repairs for vulnerable people. RECOMMENDATION(S) 9 It is recommended that the board endorse the revisions to the Group Equality & Diversity policy for approval by the Group board. BRIAN MORAN GROUP DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICES / GROUP COMPANY SECRETARY Background material Joseph Rowntree Foundation EIA tool: http://www.equip.org.uk Equality Act 2010: What do I need to know: http://www.equalities.gov.uk/pdf/401727_GEO_EqualityLaw_Community_acc3.pdf Training delivered by Whiteheads solicitors to board members on 1 October 2010: See Dropbox Events Training Legal Update 2010 Report Author Tel Date Doc ID Brian Moran 01942 608715 5/11/2010 AHA report Nov 2010 Appendix 1: Revised Group Equality & Diversity Policy equality and diversity policy Policy Statement The Adactus Housing Group recognises its discrimination on the grounds of ‘race’, responsibilities to provide equality of opportunity, national origin, ethnic origin, nationality, religion, eliminate discrimination and promote good belief or lack of religion or belief, gender, gender relations in its activities as a landlord, managing reassignment status, being married or a civil agent, employer, contractor, partner and partner, pregnancy or maternity leave, sexual purchaser. orientation, disability or age. The Group is totally opposed to all forms of Aims This policy aims to summarise how the Group is ‘Provide choice and services that are sensitive working to eliminate discrimination, promote good to the diverse needs of our customers.’ relations and increase equality of opportunity. It supports delivery of the following corporate objective of the Adactus Housing Group: Scope This policy applies to any person or organisation that any member of the Adactus Housing Group has contact with in undertaking its activities as landlord, managing agent, employer, contractor, partner and purchaser. Links to other policies and strategies The Group has established an Equality Impact The Group’s members publish annual reports Assessment process that must be applied to all (including detailed assessments against the Tenant policies to specifically consider equality and Services Authority’s national standards) which set diversity issues when polices are produced or out our assessment of our work in this area and our reviewed. plans for improvements. Context This policy has been produced in accordance with characteristics’: disability, gender reassignment, the requirements of our regulator, the Tenant pregnancy and maternity, race (including ethnic Services Authority. and national origin, colour and nationality), religion In April 2010, the Equality Act was passed by or belief, sex and sexual orientation. In the case of Parliament. Its main purpose was to bring disability, employers and service providers are together the many acts and regulations in UK law under a duty to make reasonable adjustments to that have been introduced to combat their workplaces to overcome barriers experienced discrimination. The majority of the Act came into by disabled people. force on 1 October 2010. The Group also observes the Commission for The Act requires equal treatment in access to Racial Equality code of practice on housing and employment and private and public services, on the associated guidance produced by the Equality and basis of ‘protected Human Rights Commission. It has drawn on the Equality Framework for Local Government to assess its services. Definitions Equality – A revised term for equal opportunities, Disability – in line with the Equality Act 2010, this being the same/treated the same. includes anyone who has, or has had a disability, as well as anyone who is perceived to have a disability. It also includes anyone who is Diversity – Recognising the differences in everyone associated with someone with a disability, which that make them unique and responding to an could result in that individual experiencing individual’s needs. discrimination (e.g. a carer). Our Approach As a Landlord and Managing Agent As an Employer The Group encourages its members to As an employer the Group’s equality and diversity recognise diversity and provide equality of priorities are to encourage its members to recruit opportunity by tailoring the delivery of landlord and retain talent from a wide pool and to ensure services. that staff are treated fairly and in accordance with The Group and its members will: the law. • Operate, and monitor, lettings practices that The Group and its members will: reduce the chance of discrimination. • Provide an over-the-telephone and face-to- • Aim to recruit and retain a workforce to reflect the face interpreting service. diversity of its customer-base. • Make available publications concerning health • Operate, and monitor, recruitment practices and safety, service changes and other highly that reduce the chance of discrimination. significant topics in alternative languages and • Maintain ‘Positive about Disabilities’ formats. Always consider requests for other accreditation and display the ‘Positive about publications to be translated into alternative Disabilities’ logo on all job advertisements. languages and formats. • In accordance with the Disability Discrimination • Ensure, where possible, that all offices will be Act, guarantee people with a disability an fully accessible for disabled people. interview for any employment vacancy provided • Use tenancy agreements that recognise the that they meet the essential criteria. rights of same-sex partner relationships. • Provide a wide range of customer • Continue employing, wherever practicable, consultation methods. employees who become disabled during • Respect and, where possible, accommodate their employment, and assist in their the religious practices of customers. retraining. • Subscribe to the Housing Diversity Network • Maintain accurate customer profile records (HDN) and advertise all job vacancies on the in accordance with the Data Protection HDN website. Act. • Provide annual training for staff on equality • Prioritise repairs requests from residents and diversity issues. with support needs. • Provide annual training for Board members. • Investigate any differences in customer • Respect the religious practices of staff in satisfaction between different groups. Take the workplace. action where the cause of dissatisfaction is • Offer flexible working hours and arrangements. within our control as the landlord. • Ensure that pay is determined equitably. • Build new properties that meet the ‘Life time Homes’ standard. • Provide enhanced maternity and paternity leave and offer staff the option to purchase childcare • Operate harassment and domestic violence vouchers tax free. procedures that provide support for the • Have a zero-tolerance approach to racist victim. behaviour and other harassment. • Employ an Occupational Therapist to speedily • Equally apply terms and conditions assess requests for disabled adaptations. irrespective of an employee’s sexuality. • Maintain accurate records of adapted properties. • Make an equality impact assessment • Carry out equality impact assessments of the of all employment policies, when Contact Centre (the hub of customer contact) introduced or reviewed. annually. Carry out equality impact • Be sensitive to gender reassignment. assessments of other services when policies are reviewed or changed. As a Purchaser As a Contractor and Partner The Group will use its purchasing power to ensure As a contractor or partner providing services to that its contractors’ service delivery is consistent a third party, the Group’s members will with the Group’s equality and diversity maintain their commitment to provide equality of opportunity, eliminate discrimination and commitments. promote good relations. The Group and its members will: The Group and its members will: • Require maintenance contractors to agree to work within a Code of Conduct which Not accept instructions from any client or partner emphasises the Group’s expectations with that indicates an intention to discriminate regard to equality and diversity. unlawfully. • Ensure that out-of-hours contractors operate a telephone interpreting service. • Require contractors to commit to achieving equality and diversity targets for staffing and customer satisfaction. Equality & Diversity Impact Assessment No adverse impact identified. Monitoring and Evaluation An evaluation of our performance in this area is published in our annual reports which include detailed assessment against the TSA’s national standards in the areas of equality and diversity (this information replaces our previously published Equalities Scheme): Adactus Housing Association Ltd http://aha.adactushousing.co.uk/Annual-Report Beech Housing Association Ltd http://beech.adactushousing.co.uk/annual-report Chorley Community Housing Ltd http://www.chorleych.co.uk/annualreport Appendix 2: Changes incorporated in revised Group Equality & Diversity Policy Policy Statement No change Aims Change second sentence to read; It supports delivery of the following corporate objective of the Adactus Housing Group: Provide choice and services that are sensitive to the diverse needs of our customers. Links to other policies and strategies Add after first sentence: The Group’s members publish annual reports (including detailed assessments against the Tenant Services Authority’s national standards) which set out our assessment of our work in this area and our plans for improvements. Context Replace first sentence with: This policy has been produced in accordance with the requirements of our regulator, the Tenant Services Authority. Replace second paragraph and bullets list with: In April 2010, the Equality Act was passed by Parliament. Its main purpose was to bring together the many acts and regulations in UK law that have been introduced to combat discrimination. The majority of the Act came into force on 1 October 2010. The Act requires equal treatment in access to employment as well as private and public services, on the basis of ‘protected characteristics’: disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race (including ethnic and national origin, colour and nationality), religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation. In the case of disability, employers and service providers are under a duty to make reasonable adjustments to their workplaces to overcome barriers experienced by disabled people. Add to third paragraph; It has drawn on the Equality Framework for Local Government to assess its services. Definitions Add Disability – in line with the Equality Act 2010, this includes anyone who has, or has had a disability, as well as anyone who is perceived to have a disability. It also includes anyone who is associated with someone with a disability, which could result in that individual experiencing discrimination (e.g. a carer). Our approach Move the section ‘As a landlord…’ in front of the section ‘as an employer’. As a landlord – bullet 3 Make available publications concerning health and safety, service changes and other highly significant topics in alternative languages and formats. Always consider requests for other publications to be translated into alternative languages and formats. As a landlord – bullet 9 Prioritise repairs requests from residents with support needs. As a landlord – bullet 10 add Take action where the cause of dissatisfaction is within our control as landlord. As a landlord – bullet 15 Carry out equality impact assessments of the Contact Centre (the hub of customer contact) annually. Carry out equality impact assessments of other services when policies are reviewed or changed. As an employer – bullet 1: delete ‘set equality targets for recruitment and publish performance’. As an employer – bullet 15: add ‘..policies, when introduced or reviewed.’ Monitoring and evaluation Replace with: An evaluation of our performance in this area is published in our annual reports which include detailed assessment against the TSA’s national standards in the areas of equality and diversity (this information replaces our previously published Equalities Scheme): Adactus Housing Associaton Ltd http://aha.adactushousing.co.uk/Annual-Report Beech Housing Association Ltd http://beech.adactushousing.co.uk/annual-report Chorley Community Housing Ltd http://www.chorleych.co.uk/annualreport Getting in touch Replace contact details with new Connect numbers and CCH number. Report of Meeting Date Item No. Brian Moran Group Director of Corporate Adactus Housing 15 November 2010 Services Association Board 6.2 RESIDENT INVOLVEMENT FRAMEWORK PURPOSE OF REPORT 1 To present proposals for a new framework for resident involvement following the recent value for money review of the service. BACKGROUND 2 At the previous meeting the board received the results of a review of the resident involvement service. This paper presents a proposal for a new framework for resident involvement to address the findings of the review. It also includes a discussion about the issue of tenant scrutiny following the board's decision at the last meeting that Group Focus should not undertake a scrutiny role. Drivers for change 3 'Co-regulation' is the defining concept at the heart of the Tenant Services Authority's regulatory framework which seems set to have a lifespan beyond that of the TSA itself. The TSA characterise co-regulation as “robust self-regulation by the boards and councilors who govern the delivery of housing services, incorporating effective tenant involvement subject to a ‘backbone’ of regulation from the TSA” (emphasis added). Early in 2010, members expressed concerns about whether the existing resident involvement service was delivering the ‘effective’ involvement required to support the new co-regulatory approach. 4 The matter was discussed at July's board awayday and concerns about the existing service centred on a perception that a relatively large amount of resources had become focused on involving a relatively small number of tenants in resident involvement activities. Members were of the view that this had led to a situation where the service was generating poor business intelligence. 5 Board members requested that the matter be consulted on widely and, in August, a telephone survey of 440 residents from across the Adactus Housing Group was therefore conducted. This work showed that residents shared the same concerns as board members with an overwhelming proportion (in excess of 90%) stating that both more residents should be regularly involved and that these residents should be diverse enough to achieve a fair cross-section of all customers. 6 The results indicate that an apparent over-reliance on meetings is a barrier to wider involvement with 84% of residents stating that they had never come to a local meeting (let alone a centrally held one) and 76% stating that they would be no more likely to attend a meeting if they were paid to do so. Transcripts of some of the statements made by tenants on this issue are provided below: “Don’t feel that tenant meetings are very productive” “Would like to attend meetings but due to work etc unable to attend” “Cannot attend due to not being able to go out without a partner” “Can’t read or write so better to contact by telephone” “Not good with post, over the phone is better” 7 To summarise: The priorities of both board members and tenants point to a need to increase the numbers of tenants regularly involved with the service and to make attempts to improve their representation of the views of the wider tenant population. It seems likely that new methods of involvement that are less reliant on meetings will need to be introduced to achieve these aims. Methods for involvement 8 Other results from the same survey provide an indication of the proportions of tenants that could potentially be involved through different methods of communication: Diagram 1: Potential coverage of involvement methods 9 Clearly, these methods of communication differ in their usefulness: for example, a text messaging service will not provide comparable qualitative information to that gained from a successful meeting, (although it may well achieve a quantitative response from someone who would never consider coming to a meeting). The existing service has undertaken some postal questionnaire work and produces well-regarded newsletters, it does however seem likely that it has overly-focused its resources on the administration of meetings, at the expense of these other methods, inevitably targeting relatively small numbers of tenants (less than 1% are regularly involved in activities). 10 That 43% of tenants were found to use social networking was a genuine surprise and is worthy of further comment. The finding is corroborated by national data on the rapid, recent rise in the use of Twitter and Facebook in particular. Given that mobile phones now offer social networking capabilities at very affordable costs, and the wide demographic appeal of Facebook and Twitter, the growth in the use of such services amongst residents is likely to continue and will be a significant factor moving forward. 11 The use of telephone calls to undertake surveys or detailed interviews has perhaps been the most overlooked method of communication given that it offers access to the greatest numbers of customers. The administration of telephone surveys undoubtedly fits well with the resources offered by the recent introduction of a call centre. Board members have previously expressed a view that 'cold calling' should be avoided. We have already however had notable success in administering very short surveys at the end of an incoming call. It may also be possible to develop an 'opt-in' approach, to explore feedback in detail from residents who have recently received a service for example. Proposals: new resident involvement framework 12 Diagram 2 provides an overview of the new proposals for the resident involvement framework: Diagram 2: new resident involvement framework 13 General customer research The Association's efforts to undertake general customer research to support the development of services will continue. Recent experience has shown the value of using both SMS and short telephone surveys administered by the contact centre to rapidly gain useful quantitative data. These techniques will supplement the existing approaches of using postal surveys and point-of- service questionnaires. 14 Area panels It is proposed to broadly continue with the existing arrangements for local area panels but to also expand on their role as a result of the lessons learned from Adactus Housing Association’s Local Offer pilot in Manchester which revealed a keen interest in residents monitoring the Association’s performance. Whilst the panels will continue to control the neighbourhood funds it is also envisaged that they will also have the ability to scrutinise performance information and management decisions should they wish to do so. Given the government’s localism agenda it also seems likely that these panels could be the most appropriate vehicle to become involved in future complaints cases although an alternative is for this to sit with members of the Adactus500 (see paragraph 21 below). 15 Adactus500 It is through this vehicle that the Group will seek to gain representative feedback on its services and plans. It is proposed that each year 500 people will be invited to join the Adactus500, with the aim of achieving a representative cross-section of involved tenants. Members of the Adactus500 will be given the opportunity to choose from a wide menu of involvement opportunities (across the entire range of possibilities summarised in Diagram 1) and will be rewarded for their involvement. Social networking will be one of the methods used to advertise new assignments to the Adactus500 (in-effect offering a reward for following the Association's Facebook or Twitter stream), and members will be encouraged to use a website to register for assignments and submit feedback to reduce administration requirements. In future years it is proposed that it will be the members of the Adactus500 that formally agree the Association's co- regulatory approach through discussion at the annual resident conference. 16 Webconnect At the last board meeting, the board took the decision to publish future board papers online. Webconnect develops this idea to allow for a two-way public dialogue between the Association and its customers. Non-confidential board papers will be published on a company blog and anyone will be able to comment on the blog. Again, social networking will be used to advertise the availability of new agendas and refer users to the blog where questions and comments may be posted. Moderation of posts will be an issue and this will require some administration initially at least by staff. Feedback received will be reported to the board. In addition to this, Webconnect will host a suggestion scheme and online question and answer sessions with senior staff. The issue of tenant scrutiny 17 The TSA’s current regulatory framework does not define what tenant scrutiny is nor place any specific requirements for scrutiny on housing associations other than that the arrangements put in place should be publicised to tenants. This has led to a range of approaches being adopted by housing associations. 18 On 18 October however the government published a ‘Review of social housing regulation’ which is more specific about the future expectations placed on housing associations in this regard. It is notable that the Review limits its discussion of tenant scrutiny to the availability of timely performance information (particularly with regard to performance against Local Offers) and to a role for tenant panels to become involved in the complaints process. It does not mention scrutiny of board decisions or board papers. 19 The Review recommends that the regulator be directed to ‘make clear an expectation that landlords should welcome scrutiny via a tenant panel (or equivalent body) as well as encourage their role in handling complaints.’ In the framework presented in this report, the equivalent body is envisaged to be the Local Area Panels and/or a subset of the Adactus500 potentially for involvement in the complaints process. A Communities and Local Government press release of 18 October explains that the Government now plans to discuss with the four National Tenant Organisations ideas for developing a framework to set out what an effective tenant panel should look like. 20 This issue will therefore develop over the coming months and may need to return to board at a future date. It is clear however that the resident involvement framework presented in this report is at least compatible with the thrust of the Review’s recommendations and seems to go beyond them in that scrutiny of board decisions and papers is included and because several mechanisms for scrutiny are proposed: scrutiny of local management decisions and performance at the Local Area Panels, scrutiny of service delivery primarily through the Adactus 500, and scrutiny of board decisions and organizational performance through Webconnect. 21 The rationale for this wider approach is that it is a response to the strong priority of the board and residents to open-up opportunities for involvement to as many people as possible. The approach taken is in accordance with a statement by the TSA in a recently published document about 'Tenant Insight', which highlights the importance of using market research techniques to “provide robust evidence to inform performance assessment and scrutiny approaches”. The implication being that approaches to providing scrutiny should respond to the demands from residents. RISK ISSUES 22 The issue raised and recommendations made in this report involve risk considerations in the following categories Financial impact Business interruption Health & Safety Reputation and image Asset loss Corporate objectives/performance 23 It is important to ensure that the proposals meet the TSA's regulatory expectations. The opportunity was therefore taken to discuss these proposals with the TSA as part of a planned regulatory meeting on 29 September. The TSA raised no in-principle objection to the proposals either at the meeting or within their post-meeting letter confirming the issues discussed. 24 As expected, whilst some members of Group Focus have expressed their support for the proposals, some (around six people) have reacted negatively. An attempt has been made to draw out the issues of substance (correspondence with the Chair of Group Focus is presented at Appendix 1) and these are highlighted in the section below for the board to consider. There is however a risk that the Association will be drawn into a public argument with this vocal minority of tenants. The Chair of Group Focus has sought external advice from TAROE and a meeting between Michael Gelling of TAROE and the group chief executive and company secretary has been arranged for 9 November - the outcome of this discussion will be verbally reported to the board. VALUE FOR MONEY/SUSTAINABILITY/EQUALITY/CONSULTATION IMPLICATIONS 25 The proposals improve value for money by more closely aligning resources to the priorities of both the board and residents. 26 The proposals are cost neutral in the current financial year. No redundancies are proposed, although one part-time member of the existing resident involvement team will be asked to switch their duties from the administration of meetings etc. to the management of the Adactus500 and moderation of Webconnect. Cover will be provided by the Marketing & PR team. The online functionality of both Webconnect and the Adactus500 can be developed within existing budgets for web enhancement work in the current financial year. There will be a budget implication for involvement rewards for the Adactus500 across the Group for 2011/12 which will worked-up as part of the budgeting process later this year (anticipated to be in the region of £10,000 across the Group). 27 In accordance with the Group's VFM Strategy, the VFM methodology has been applied and the following VFM measures are proposed to monitor the performance of the new framework: • Increase the number of regularly involved tenants to 220 by 30 December 2011. • Increase % tenants satisfied that views are taken into account to 70% by 31 March 2012. • Achieve baseline representative data for all customer facing services on resident satisfaction and priorities by 30 December 2011 28 Residents have been consulted via 440 telephone surveys during August; a meeting with 10 members of Group Focus in September; and the highlighting of this issue at the 2010 Resident Conference where a draft version of this report was given to 150 attendees for consideration and comment. 29 Two members of Group Focus have contacted the group chief executive and director of operations to express their support of the proposals with a further three members indicating their support at the Resident Conference. At the Resident Conference immediate feedback was sought from tenants during the lunchtime exhibition with the result that 29 tenants said they were in support of the proposals and only one tenant was found to be in opposition. No further comments on the draft report were received from tenants. 30 The following substantive issues have been raised by residents in opposition to, or to modify the proposals: • With regard to their role as tenant inspectors, members of Group Focus raised concerns that there had been significant investment in their training in recent years and the new proposals would in effect ‘throw this away’. It seems fair to say that this is the main point of contention from most members of Group Focus who oppose the new proposals. • The Chair of Group Focus appears to disagree that scrutiny is accounted for in the new proposals. He seems to believes that there should be one scrutiny panel scrutinizing the Group’s activities. This position would seem to be at odds with both the Government’s Localism agenda and the statements about scrutiny made in the ‘Review of social housing regulation’. • He has also requested that resident Neighbourhood Champions be appointed at Cat 1 sheltered schemes and be provided with Laptops. The cost of providing IT equipment to Neighbourhood Champions at Cat 1 schemes would be approximately £500 per scheme per annum. The additional demand placed on the Group’s IT support team from up to 45 schemes across the Group would be a more significant issue. The provision of IT equipment to a non- employee raises a number of risks relating to the potential misuse of such equipment and the value of providing such equipment is not clear. 31 An equality impact assessment has been undertaken using the Joseph Rowntree Foundation online tool. The assessment is positive with the main driver for this being the promotion of digital inclusion. RECOMMENDATION(S) 32 It is recommended that the board approve the new resident involvement framework. Reason for recommendation: to improve business intelligence gained through the service and to better meet tenant priorities to increase the numbers and improve the range of residents who are regularly involved with the service. BRIAN MORAN GROUP DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICES / GROUP COMPANY SECRETARY Background papers The Regulatory Framework: Review of social housing regulation: http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/housing/socialhousingregulation CLG Press release: http://www.communities.gov.uk/news/housing/1743507 Report Author Tel Date Doc ID Brian Moran 01942 608715 3 November 2010 AGA report Nov 2010 Appendix 1: Correspondence with Chair of Group Focus From: Brian Moran Sent: 24 September 2010 21:41 To: hugh mcgarry Subject: Re: Gp focus Meeting Hi Hugh I suspect that we probably have a different view of what the term 'scrutiny' means. If you would like to get together to hammer this out, give me a shout (my mobile number is below). Either way, it would be helpful for you to provide me with any further comments on this issue before November. I will then be able to feed-in your views to the boards for consideration along with any final proposals we make during November's board cycle. Have a great weekend. Brian On 22 Sep 2010, at 16:20, "hugh mcgarry" <email@example.com> wrote: hi Brian I have studied and studied your responses and I still cant see where scrutiny comes in,so I am taking advice from outside of the Organisation. Thank you very much indeed for your courtesy HughMac ----- Original Message ----- From: Brian Moran To: hugh mcgarry Cc: Paul Lees ; Richard Houghton Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 1:46 PM Subject: RE: Gp focus Meeting Hi Hugh As I promised you on Friday, I will make sure that the boards see the questions/points you have raised when they consider this whole issue in November. However, I feel it is courteous for me to respond to your points/queries myself. Please note though that the responses below are based on my own personal views and may differ from the position taken by the boards in November: 1 The Scrutiny Panel was set up to monitor and assess the Organisations behaviour and performance. and to hold it to account for poor performance and poor services.I cannot see the ability to do that on your diagram,so who now is going to do that. / Also could you please give me the reason Why the Board decided Scrutiny should not be undertaken by Gp Focus.Who do they suggest does do it ? 1. The terms of reference for the scrutiny role proposed for Group Focus were unanimously rejected by the Group’s boards, I therefore think it is more accurate to speak of the idea of a ‘Scrutiny Panel’ being explored, rather than having been ‘set up’. That point aside, the ability to allow for proper scrutiny is foremost in our minds in making the proposals you were presented with on Friday. The slides on pages 17 – 19 of the pdf of the presentation I sent to you on Friday explain where we propose scrutiny will sit. In general terms we are moving to a situation of transparent governance: board papers, agendas and minutes will be published on the web (provisionally branded as Webconnect) alongside explanations (likely to include video) of the reasoning process followed in reaching particular decisions. Anyone will be able to view all this and anyone will be able to challenge decisions made by the board via online discussion. This, of course, includes the current members of Group Focus. We will add a standing board paper to our future board agendas to provide upward feedback on the scrutiny comments received. In addition to this there will need to be scrutiny of some local decisions taken by managers and staff from time-to- time and as highlighted in the slide on page 17 of the pdf, we propose that the proper place to do this would be the Local Area Panels. We expect that the list of these issues will be produced from our consultation on our Local Offers. The reasons why the boards feel that Group Focus should not undertake the scrutiny role were stated in the presentation. They have started from a position of challenging whether our current approach to tenant involvement is effective (see slides on page 2). The initial discussion of the service by board members is summarised on the slides shown on pages 4 – 6, and many of the points recorded here apply to Group Focus – with the main issues arising from the judgement of staff and board members that too few people are involved with Group Focus. Given, the results of the telephone survey we subsequently conducted (see slides on pages 9 – 14), the board are of the view that we must respond to this feedback from tenants and put in place mechanisms for scrutiny and involvement that are not reliant on physical meetings. 2 Sheltered Housing should have a Neighbourhood Champion with a Lap Top to use 2. I think this is an interesting idea and will take it to the boards as a costed proposal. I would raise a note of caution at this stage as I: a) imagine potential difficulties around providing technical support for the Laptops and; b) wonder whether there would need to have some sort of formalised (contractual?) relationship between landlord and Neighbourhood Champion. These issues may not be deal breakers however and I would welcome your further thoughts on this. 3 We dont think that Tenant Inspectors Scrutiny should be put on the Website because you cannot inspect on a website 3. I think there is a mis-understanding here with regard to the proposed role of inspectors. The proposed role of inspectors and mystery shoppers will continue to be that of hands-on testing of our products and services. Whilst we envisage that members of the Adactus 500 will choose from a menu of options the products/services they wish to inspect/mystery shop, this does not mean that the inspection will be done via the web. 4 Can we have a breakdown of the customer involvement expenditure that was sent to the board. 4. Attached as requested. Please note that the board requested a more complete analysis of costs to be conducted and the figures quoted in the presentation are based on these. Principally what has differed is we improved the estimate of staff time used and added in the costs of the neighbourhood fund and group tenant newsletters. Kind Regards Brian From: hugh mcgarry [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] Sent: 06 September 2010 12:45 To: Brian Moran Subject: Re: Gp focus Meeting thanks Brian ----- Original Message ----- From: Brian Moran To: hugh mcgarry Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 11:48 AM Subject: Re: Gp focus Meeting Clarification on CAT 1 noted Hugh. I'll roll your other question into the others for later discussion/response. Kind Regard Brian Sent from my iPad On 6 Sep 2010, at 11:22, "hugh mcgarry" <email@example.com> wrote: sorry to bother you again Brian but that Sheltered question was about CAT 1 Tenants Also could you please give me the reason Why the Board decided Scrutiny should not be undertaken by Gp Focus.Who do they suggest does do it ? HughMac ----- Original Message ----- From: Brian Moran To: hugh mcgarry Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2010 5:03 PM Subject: Re: Gp focus Meeting Thanks for these Hugh I will discuss your questions/points with others and be in touch. Kind Regards Brian Sent from my iPad On 4 Sep 2010, at 15:41, "hugh mcgarry" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: Hi again Brian, Here are the Questions from the Group 1 The Scrutiny Panel was set up to monitor and assess the Organisations behaviour and performance. and to hold it to account for poor performance and poor services.I cannot see the ability to do that on your diagram,so who now is going to do that. 2 Sheltered Housing should have a Neighbourhood Champion with a Lap Top to use 3 We dont think that Tenant Inspectors Scrutiny should be put on the Website because you cannot inspect on a website 4 Can we have a breakdown of the customer involvement expenditure that was sent to the board. That will do for now Brian HughMac ----- Original Message ----- From: Brian Moran To: hugh mcgarry Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 3:14 PM Subject: RE: Gp focus Meeting Hi Hugh I was pleased to meet you too; sorry again about the lack of biscuits! As requested, I attach the presentation from this morning as a pdf file. Slide 3 looks slightly strange as there was animation on it, if you have any problems reading it let me know. I look forward to hearing your feedback and have a great weekend. Kind Regards Brian PS If you ever want to talk to me, my mobile number is 07793 186781. From: hugh mcgarry [mailto:email@example.com] Sent: 03 September 2010 14:26 To: Brian Moran Subject: Gp focus Meeting hi Brian I was very glad to meet you today,Now I know who youn are.Can you please let me have the Material that went with the Diagram you gave me,before I put the Questions from the Post Meeting to you thanks Hugh Mc Garry 0151 924 3149. firstname.lastname@example.org Beech Housing Association Ltd. Board papers for agenda items 7.1 to 7.3: One-off decisions 7.1 Swallow Cottage, Greenbank Cottage, H. Roberts (confidential) Sabden 7.2 Authorised Loan Signatories P. Chisnell (confidential) 7.3 Rent Increase 2011-12 P. Chisnell (enclosed) Report of Meeting Date Item No. Paul Chisnell Beech Housing 15 November 2010 Group Director of Finance Association Board 7.3 ANNUAL REVIEW OF RENT PLAN AND RENT INCREASE PURPOSE OF REPORT 1 To approve the Association’s rent increases for the forthcoming financial year. BACKGROUND 2 When setting its rents the Association must comply with the Tenant Services Authority (TSA) rules on rent restructuring which have been in place since 2002. The rent restructuring guidance aims to ensure all properties within the same areas, being of equal size (no of bedrooms) and having similar services will all pay an equal rent. 3 The new rent based on the agreed formula as outlined by the TSA, called a “Target Rent” should be in place by 2012 and Associations are monitored as to how they reach target rent from the current base rent. Rent Increase 4 The government formula is RPI (at September 2010) + 0.5% +/-£2 (which is the rent restructuring allowance). For the setting of 2011/12 rents, the RPI at September 2010 must be used which was 4.6%, so the increase to be applied before any rent restructuring adjustment is 5.1%. 5 By applying the government’s formula, the % of tenants which will be at or above target rent by March 2012 will be 82% (where a target rent has been set) and 95% within 5 years. The TSA are kept informed of the Association’s progress and ability to meet target rents by 2012. 6 By applying the government’s formula the average rent increase applied to the Associations tenants (88% of cases) will be between 5%-6%, equating to an approximate increase per week of £4. this brings the associations average weekly rent to £68.29. 7 The above statistics do not take into account the fact natural turnover of tenancies will improve the % of tenancies at target rent as all new tenants go straight to target rent. RISK ISSUES 8 The issue raised and recommendations made in this report involve risk considerations in the following categories Financial impact Business interruption Health & Safety Reputation and image Asset loss Corporate objectives/performance 9 The process of setting rents is managed by the Group Director of Finance and there are multiple checks in place to ensure rents area accurate and applied consistently. 10 The application of the government’s rent formula is a regulatory requirement. The formula has been applied correctly and the TSA have been kept informed of the Association’s progress in achieving target rents via the Annual Viability Review. VALUE FOR MONEY/SUSTAINABILITY/EQUALITY/CONSULTATION IMPLICATIONS 11 The aims of the rent Policy are to set charges in a fair and consistent approach. This ensures the future viability of the Association whilst complying with TSA requirements. It also ensures charges are affordable to Tenants and Leaseholders who are in low paid employment RECOMMENDATION(S) 12 The Board is asked to approve the increases outlined within the main body of the report. Reason for recommendation: To comply with regulatory requirements. PAUL CHISNELL GROUP DIRECTOR OF FINANCE Report Author Tel Date Doc ID Kimberley Clarke 01942 267775 2 November 2010 BHA report Nov 2010 Beech Housing Association Ltd. Board papers for agenda items 8.1 to 8.7: Performance monitoring 8.1 Performance Scorecard Quarter 2 B. Moran (enclosed) 2011/10 8.2 Development report H. Roberts (confidential) 8.3 Management Accounts April to P. Chisnell (confidential) September 2010 8.4 New Sales report H. Roberts (enclosed) 8.5 Priority Business plan projects progress B. Moran (enclosed) report 8.6 Staircasing and Resales P. Chisnell (confidential) 8.7 Leaseholder/Trust Fund as at September P. Chisnell (confidential) 2010 Report of Meeting Date Item No. Richard Houghton, Director Beech Housing 15th November 2010 of Operations Association Board 8.1 PERFORMANCE SCORECARD – QUARTER 2 2010/11 PURPOSE OF REPORT 1 To report to the Board of Management performance in the first two quarters of 2010/11. BACKGROUND Balanced Scorecard 2 For 2010/11, the scorecard presents data for the condensed set of Key Performance Indicators agreed in the Business Plan in order to provide a more focused picture of overall performance. Performance is based on the stock owned by the Association. Appendix 1 presents this data for Quarter 2 and year to date. Commentary/explanatory notes are provided for any KPIs that are out of target. 3 The Scorecard shows strong or improving performance in the following key areas: • Rent collection has exceeded target during Quarter 2 and is above the Housemark Benchmark. Void loss is also well within target and performance exceeds the national benchmark. • Average number of jobs completed by DLO staff is improving month on month, consistently exceeding the target of 5 jobs per day per member of staff. • Performance for calls answered within the target time of 15 seconds has again shown an increase and is within target. This is coupled with a higher proportion of calls being resolved at first point of contact, a result of the increased experience of staff in the contact centre and presence of a duty neighbourhood officer to assist with queries on the spot. • Average time taken to relet vacant rental property: this has improved since the start of the financial year assisted by having the whole relet and void process under the control of a single team. 4 Areas where performance improvement will focus include: • Management of ASB cases in agreed timescales: a small number of ASB cases fell out of target shortly after the restructure at the Breathe office as initially some staff were not aware of how to update the ASB database. Performance should improve in quarters 3 and 4 now that staff are fully trained and the team are firmly established. RISK ISSUES 5 The issue raised and recommendations made in this report involve risk considerations in the following categories Financial impact Business interruption Health & Safety Reputation and image Asset loss Corporate objectives/performance 6 The Performance Scorecard is one of a number of performance management tools in place which help the organisation identify promptly and devise plans to address areas of under- performance. VALUE FOR MONEY/SUSTAINABILITY/EQUALITY/CONSULTATION IMPLICATIONS 7 None. RECOMMENDATION(S) 8 The board is recommended to resolve to note the performance report. Report Author Tel Date Doc ID Chris Smith 01942 608715 3 November 2010 BHA report Nov 2010 Appendix 1 Beech Housing Association Performance Scorecard – November 2010 Key: F = Frequency of reporting (q = quarterly; a = annual) YTD = year to date performance Benchmark = upper quartile performance for north-west based HAs (based on Housemark’s year end data) Trend: = improved performance (compared with previous quarter/year end data) = declining performance (compared with previous quarter/year end data) = = performance at same level as previous quarter/year end data Beech Housing Association-Quarter 2 performance (July-September) Scorecard Performance - Key Indicators F YR END 0910 (where QTR 1 QTR 2 YTD Benchmark ** Target Status Trend available) Make the most of being part of a group % of business plan projects completed on time Q 0.00% No projects No projects No projects >75% due due due Make the most of what we have to achieve % of fixed rate debt Q 94.83% 90.56% 90.56% 90.56% >90% = Average annual operating cost per unit owned Q £138.37 £122.11 £260.48 <£410.00 % of rent lost through vacant property Q 1.00% 0.85% 0.20% 0.36% 1.61% <2% (RSR 2010) % of rent collected Q 101.78% 103.46% 99.47% 101.49% 100.45% >99% = Average DLO productivity Q 5.54 jobs 5.83 jobs 5.69 jobs > 5 jobs Do our bit for the environment CO2 emissions A <630 tonnes 76 77 77 77 72 >75 = Average SAP rating from homes A Increase resident satisfaction % of repairs completed at first visit Q 88.80% 86.71% 86.73% >85% = % satisfied with completed repair Q 100.00% 100.00% 98.90% 99.39% >90% = % satisfied with planned maintenance works Q No planned No planned >90% works works carried out carried out % of calls answered within 15 seconds Q 79.04% 85.46% 88.71% 87.46% 80% in 20 seconds >75% (MPATHY report 2010) % calls resolved at first point of contact Q 72.10% 68.60% 79.52% 74.14% 78% (MPATHY >70% report 2010) % callbacks within target time Q Supporting data not available # >70% % ASB cases managed in target timescales Q 43.75% 100% (1 60.00% 67% >75% case) % Overall tenant satisfaction A 83.40% 81.8% (#) >82% Ensure the groups boards are appropriately skilled % board attendance Q 80.00% 71.43% 85.71% 78.94% >75% Key skill areas without board members expertise Q 0 0 0 <1 = Help improve neighbourhoods % neighbourhood investment delivered to timetable A No tasks due No tasks due >90% Average relet times Q 28.84 32.86 days 25.37 days 30.60 days 23.9 days <28 days ($) ($) ($) Achieve growth % practical completions against target Q 100.00% No No No >=100% completions completions completions due due due Units managed by the Group (target group wide) Q 12759 12739 12712 12712 >15,000 Raise standards in supported housing Services assessed to Level B of QAF Q 100% No Beech No Beech 100.00% schemes schemes assessed assessed Help tenants with the cost of living Number of tenants who have been assisted with the A 4260 tenants (energy 990 YTD [431 received financial inclusion >3740 (2008 - target cost of living $$ advice /improvements advice (339 AHA, 15 BHA, 77 CCH), boiler 2010) achieved only) replacements (298 AHA, 6 BHA, 225 CCH) no cavity insulations to date ] Ensure diversity in service delivery % of areas assessed to level 2 of the framework A 100.00% KEY ** :Benchmark data: Housemark year end report 2010 Quarter 2 (upper quartile) unless indicated otherwise $$ This KPI has now been redefined to include tenants who have accessed the financial inclusion service and the number who have had cavity insulation/new boilers and other asset management measures to increase the energy efficiency of heir homes. # : Internal monitoring of callback performance showed high levels of timely call backs. This was not supported by a text survey of a sample of callers. Subsequently, we have reduced significantly the number of callbacks organised by siting a duty neighbourhood officer in the Contact Centre, who is able to deal with these queries on the spot. An income officer, as part of the Manchester arrears pilot, is also now based in the Contact Centre, performing a similar role. y ASB cases managed within target timescales Due to a recent restructure and changes to staff at the Breathe office, a small number of ASB cases were not progressed promptly, Units managed by the Group As agreed in December 2009, the target for 'units managed by the Group' will only be met through merger or the addition of new group members to AHG. As members were advised at the July board away day, discussion with Harvest Housing Group have ended due to irreconcilable differences. The Group chief executive is continuing to contact alternative candidates. Beech Housing Association-Definitions of KPI's Scorecard Performance - Key Indicators Definition Make the most of being part of a group % of business plan projects completed on time The number of business plan projects completed on time as a proportion of the business plan projects due for completion Make the most of what we have to achieve efficiency % of fixed rate debt The amount of monies borrowed on fixed interest rates (as a proportion of the total loan portfolio) Average annual operating cost per unit The average operating costs (including those for maintenance, both planned and responsive, and housing management) per unit of property owned. % of rent lost through vacant property Total void loss in the year so far (rent lost from vacant properties) divided by the rent debited year to date. % of rent collected Payments received divided by total occupied rent (rent debit excluding void loss). The figures for Quarter 1 and 2 are based on performance for the whole quarter whereas the YTD figure is based on the highest figure from the last four weeks in order to minimise the value of housing benefit 'technical arrears'. Average DLO productivity The total number of jobs (including void work) completed by DLO staff divided by the total number of operatives available for work during the period (allowing for long-term sick/bank holidays etc) divided by the total number of working days in the period (in order to obtain average jobs per operative per day). Do our bit for the environment CO2 emmissions The amount of CO2 emissions from offices and business mileage A measure of a homes energy efficiency (expressed on a scale of 1 to 100). The higher the number the better the rating influenced by insulation, heating efficiency etc. Average SAP rating from homes Increase resident satisfaction % of repairs completed at first visit The proportion of tenants who had a completed repair and indicated the job was completed at first visit divided by the total number of tenants with a repair who agreed to complete the survey on the operatives PDA's. % satisfied with completed repair The proportion of tenants who have had a completed repair and indicated they were satisfied with the work (as a proportion of the total number of tenants who completed the survey on the operatives PDA). % satisfied with planned maintenance works The proportion of tenants who have undergone planned maintenance work in their home and have indicated they were satisfied with the work (as a proportion of the total number of tenants who completed the survey). % of calls answered within 15 seconds The proportion of calls answered in the contact centre in less than 15 seconds. % calls resolved at first point of contact The proportion of tenants who called the contact centre in the period and responded to an automated text message to indicate that their call was resolved at the first point of contact (as a proportion of the total number of text responses received). % callbacks within target time Accurate data (and an accurate method of measurement) for 'callbacks within target time' is not currently available but will be supplied year to date for next Board meeting along with a precise definition of calculation method. % ASB cases managed in target timescales The proportion of ASB cases dealt with 'in target' (at both the contact complainant and action planning stage) as a proportion of the total number of ASB cases opened in the period. % Overall tenant satisfaction The proportion of tenants in the Annual Tenant Satisfaction Survey who indicate that they are very or fairly satisfied with the overall service provided by their landlord. Ensure the groups boards are appropriately skilled % board attendance The number of total board attendances made by board members as a proportion of the board attendances due Key skill areas without board members expertise The number of key skill areas where no existing board member has a particularly expertise Help improve neighbourhoods Report of Meeting Date Item No. Hilary Roberts Beech Housing 15 November 2010 8.4 Deputy Group CE/Group Association Board Director of Development NEW SALES REPORT PURPOSE OF REPORT 1 To advise the Board on progress of new sales. BACKGROUND 2 4 Properties at Waggon & Horses Development, Chorley – 3 signed up on rent to homebuy scheme and tenant signing for last remaining property Wednesday 10th November. No further Beech properties to report. RISK ISSUES 3 The report contains no risk issues for consideration by Board members VALUE FOR MONEY/SUSTAINABILITY/EQUALITY/CONSULTATION IMPLICATIONS 4 Not applicable RECOMMENDATION(S) 5 The board is recommended to note the content of the report. HILARY ROBERTS DEPUTY GROUP CE/GROUP DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT Report Author Tel Date Doc ID Hilary Roberts 01942 608 715 3 November 2010 BHA report Nov 2010 STATUS REPORT 09/11/2010 Property Association Location Status Comments Sold Date % Purchased Value Works H/O date Need Category Revised Valuation Original Valuation 78 Kenwood Road Beech Stretford Sold 04/12/2009 75% £123,750 20/05/2009 £160,000 80 Kenwood Road Beech Stretford Sold 21/08/2009 50% £82,500 20/05/2009 £160,000 82 Kenwood Road Beech Stretford Sold 21/08/2009 50% £85,000 20/05/2009 £165,000 32 Kenwood (The Lodge) Beech Stretford Sold 19/08/2009 50% £110,000 30/06/2009 £215,000 Plot 20 Waggon & Horses Beech Coppull Rent to Homebuy 25% £33,750 05/08/2010 £128,500 Plot 21 Waggon & Horses Beech Coppull Rent to Homebuy Mr & Mrs Livingsto TCD 04/10/2010 25% £33,750 05/08/2010 Unable to afford otherwise £128,500 Plot 22 Waggon & Horses Beech Coppull Rent to Homebuy Carl Ainsworth TCD 04/10/2010 25% £33,750 05/08/2010 FTB's £128,500 Plot 23 Waggon & Horses Beech Coppull Rent to Homebuy Mrs Carol Hilton TCD 27/09/2010 25% £33,750 05/08/2010 FTB / Serparated £128,500 1 of 1 Report of Meeting Date Item No. Brian Moran Group Director of Corporate Beech Housing 15 November 2010 Services / Company Association Board 8.5 Secretary PRIORITY BUSINESS PLAN PROJECTS PROGRESS REPORT PURPOSE OF REPORT 1 To inform the board of progress made to date in implementing the priority business plan projects for 2010/11. BACKGROUND 2 Section 7.2 of the group business plan highlights the priority business plan projects that board members and the executive will focus on delivering during 2010/11. These projects have been broken down into tasks and milestones and are now monitored on a monthly basis by a team of senior staff. 3 A progress summary is presented at appendix 1. The progress of projects highlighted red (and by x’s) are less than 60% on target; projects highlighted amber (and by –‘s) are between 60% and 95% on target; projects highlighted green (and by ‘s) are over 95 % on target. Blue projects contain milestones only at this stage. In accordance with the group’s principal of reporting by exception, commentary is provided below on the two projects categorised red. 4 Action plan for back office savings 0% complete Work has been delayed to better link in with the formulation of the 2011/12 budget. Anticipated completion is now December 2010. 5 Review of treasury management services (incorporating Security database) 33% complete The work to update a security database is much larger than initially anticipated. A member of staff has been tasked to this work on a full time basis for six months. Anticipated completion is now June 2011. RISK ISSUES 6 The issue raised and recommendations made in this report involve risk considerations in the following categories Financial impact Business interruption Health & Safety Reputation and image Asset loss Corporate objectives/performance 7 The group business plan is the vehicle for delivering the Association’s and Group’s corporate objectives. The use of the Clearview Business Planning and Project Management system ensures that project work is delegated to staff in order to support the delivery of corporate objectives and that the progress of projects is monitored by both the board and the executive on a regular basis. VALUE FOR MONEY/SUSTAINABILITY/EQUALITY/CONSULTATION IMPLICATIONS 8 None directly. RECOMMENDATION(S) 9 The board is recommended to note progress to date in delivering priority group business plan projects for 2010/2011. BRIAN MORAN GROUP DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICES / COMPANY SECRETARY Background papers Group business plan: Dropbox Library Core documents Report Author Tel Date Doc ID Brian Moran 01942 608715 05/11/2010 AHA report Nov 2010 Beech Housing Association Ltd. Board papers for agenda items 11.1 to 11.3: 1 Reports for Information 11.1 Regulatory information B. Moran (enclosed) 11.2 Press coverage B. Moran (enclosed) 11.3 Chief executive's letters to staff H. Roberts (confidential) Report of Meeting Date Item No. Brian Moran Group Director of Corporate Beech Housing 15 November 2010 Services / Company Association Board 11.1 Secretary REGULATORY INFORMATION PURPOSE OF REPORT 1 To report to the Board of Management regulatory and other key information from the Tenant Services Authority and the Homes and Communities Agency. BACKGROUND 2 The Tenant Services Authority’s (TSA) new regulatory arrangements came into force at the beginning of April 2010. These have replaced the Regulatory Code, Circulars and Good Practice Notes. The Coalition Government announced a review into the role and purpose of the TSA on 24 June 2010. The results were published on 18 October in the ‘Review of social housing regulation’. This report looked at the economic and consumer regulatory roles of the TSA and recommended that former be picked up by the Homes and Communities Agency, and a reduction in the latter. 3 A list of recently published Tenant Services Authority / Homes and Communities Agency announcements, as well as other publications about the regulation of social housing is provided at Appendix 1. RISK ISSUES 4 The issue raised and recommendations made in this report involve risk considerations in the following categories Financial impact Business interruption Health & Safety Reputation and image Asset loss Corporate objectives/performance 5 Associations are expected to meet the requirements that are set out in regulatory guidance. Failure to do so has the potential to impact upon future investment and our reputation. VALUE FOR MONEY/SUSTAINABILITY/EQUALITY/CONSULTATION IMPLICATIONS 6 None RECOMMENDATION(S) 7 The board is recommended to resolve to note the contents of this report. BRIAN MORAN GROUP DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICES / COMPANY SECRETARY Report Author Tel Date Doc ID Chris Smith 01942 608715 3 November 2010 BHA report Nov 2010 Appendix 1: Other Information and announcements published by or about TSA/HCA: 21 July 2010 – 2 November 2010 HCA Annual Report and Financial Statements published 29 July 2010 HCA The HCA’s Annual Report and Financial Statements 2009/10, have been published on-line, and show that the Agency has partially recovered from the market turmoil of the previous year, with its strong delivery supported by a steadily improving financial position. The Agency met or exceeded all of its key targets in 2009/10, including an ‘exceptional’ housing performance, starting or completing over 120,000 new and affordable homes. The total equates to more than half of all homes under construction during the reporting period. Net operating expenditure was up by 21% but remained within budget at £5.2bn, a reflection of increased Programme funding channelled through the HCA by Government. Expenditure increased across every core Programme with the exception of Housing Market Renewal and the Places of Change Programme, including an additional £720m on affordable housing through the NAHP and £29m on regeneration activities. The value of the HCA’s net assets grew by £214m to £1.16bn, while development assets also saw an increase in value, of £20m, resulting from a £24m writeback of the impairment charge recorded in the previous financial year. Available for sale assets grew by 130% to £381m, as a result of greater investment in low cost home ownership products, helping first time buyers and the house building industry as well as promising a return to the taxpayer in future years. Despite a significant increase in activity, reflected in a 42% increase in the value of the Agency’s Programme relative to the previous year, overall administration costs fell in line with the Agency’s efficiency target and resulted in a £2m saving. HCA Announces £19m for north west 9 August 2010 HCA The Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) has announced a major boost to Local Authorities and the house building industry with the investment of £19.9m for homes in the North West. The investment has been made from the HCA’s North West programme, which was made available following the agency’s securing of £390m in Government funding for the current financial year. The news means that building work can start on sites which had stalled due to the effects of the recession and that a new generation of council houses can be built. As well as increasing the supply of new and affordable housing across the North West, these schemes will secure hundreds of new jobs. New Homes for East Manchester receive £3.5m funding boost 11 August 2010 HCA Support from the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) has unlocked two key developments schemes in east Manchester, allowing construction to start on new affordable homes for local people. The Sarah Point scheme in Ancoats, which will be delivered by UK Land and Property, will bring provide 166 new affordable homes of which 126 will be for open market sale and 40 will be for low cost home ownership. HCA investment of £2.5m means work at the high profile scheme, which had stalled due to the effects of the recession, can now continue. The Miles Platting scheme, which will be delivered by housing regeneration specialist Lovell, has also received £1.03m funding to support the construction of 53 new affordable homes. Of these, 22 will be for open market sale; the other homes are for Adactus Housing Association - 20 will be for low cost home ownership and 11 will be for social rent. Sir Bob Kerslake appointed Permanent Secretary at Communities and Local Government 6 September 2010 HCA The current chief executive of the HCA will take up his new post on 1 November. The HCA Board has begun the process for recruiting a new chief executive from its existing group of directors initially, on an interim basis. On 5 October Pat Ritchie, HCA Director for the North East, was appointed chief executive. Peter Marsh standing down as Chief Executive of the TSA 21 October 2010 TSA Peter March announced he would be standing down “..to allow others to manage the reintegration process.” Review of Social Housing Regulation 18 October 2010 Communities and local government Following a wide-ranging review of social housing regulation, the Housing Minister Grant Shapps announced the abolition of the Tenant Services Authority (TSA), preserving its economic regulation functions in a new streamlined Homes and Communities Agency, whilst scrapping tasks considered unnecessary by Ministers - such as excessive data gathering. The end of the TSA is part of wider Government reforms of public bodies announced by Minister for the Cabinet Office, Francis Maude. Summary of review findings: • The Tenant Services Authority (TSA) should be abolished and its economic regulation and backstop consumer regulation functions transferred to the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA), generating efficiency savings in back-office functions and exploiting synergies across investment and regulation. • In order to ensure the continued independence of regulation, these functions should be vested in a statutory committee within the HCA, legally separated from HCA's investment functions and with its membership appointed by the Secretary of State. • The role of consumer regulation should be refocused on setting clear service standards for social landlords and addressing serious failures against those standards, with a higher legal threshold for regulatory intervention. • Greater onus should be placed on local mechanisms to address routine problems and to enable tenants to hold their landlord to account and press for better services. There should be a clearer role in the complaints process for locally elected representatives and tenant panels in advocating for tenants. • In order to maintain lender confidence and protect taxpayers, proactive economic regulation of housing associations should continue as now but with more focus on value for money for the taxpayer. Copies of regulatory materials are obtainable from Pauline Gresty Tel: 01942 608715 or email: email@example.com Further information about other items reported above is obtainable from the Tenant Services Authority’s Website at www.tenantservicesauthority.org and the Homes and Communities Agency’s website at www.homesandcommunities.co.uk Report of Meeting Date Item No. Brian Moran Beech Housing Group Director of Corporate Association Ltd 15 November 2010 Services Board 11.2 PRESS COVERAGE PURPOSE OF REPORT 1 This report provides a summary of all coverage for the Group across all media since the last Board Meeting. 2 The Association’s public relations activities are in support of the Group’s business plan objective to “Promote the Group’s successes and its ability to deliver”. BACKGROUND 3 No coverage concerning Beech HA in this period. A summary of the Group’s media coverage during this period is attached at Appendix 1. 4 Positive coverage for AHA during this period concentrated on: • Bootle – ASB team and successes – Neighbourhood fund • Chorley – New developments • Wigan & Leigh – ‘breathe’ regeneration initiative AYUPP – ‘ASB team 5 Negative coverage for AHA during this period concentrated on: • Chorley – Proposed development. 6 Other coverage for the Group related to CCH: • Chorley – Estate & scheme improvement works, Community hub, events/fairs and clean up days, Neighbourhood fund, competitions and awards, New developments and refurbishments, Rent matters and evictions, Board Members, Tackling ASB. RISK ISSUES 7 The issues raised and recommendations made in this report involve risk considerations in the following categories: Financial impact Business interruption Health & Safety Reputation and image Asset loss Corporate objectives/performance 8 All negative coverage during this period related to AHA and CCH, therefore BHA’s reputation has not been adversely affected. VALUE FOR MONEY/SUSTAINABILITY/EQUALITY/CONSULTATION IMPLICATIONS 9 No PR Value was achieved for BHA during this period. RECOMMENDATION(S) 10 Members are asked to note coverage generated during the period. BRIAN MORAN GROUP DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICE / GROUP COMPANY SECRETARY Background papers: Full copies of press articles can be obtained from Pauline Gresty, tel 01942 608715, email firstname.lastname@example.org Report Author Tel Date Doc ID Athanasios 01942 608715 04/11/2010 BHA report Nov 2010 Protopapas Appendix 1 Beech Housing Association Ltd Press Tracking 04 November 2010 Homemade Scarecrows launched by CCH – 20 October 2010 Chorley Guardian CCH have unveiled a homemade scarecrow made by CCH staff and residents to celebrate Charnock Richard’s annual scarecrow festival. CCH Tennant £4k up – 20 October 2010 Chorley Guardian A CCH tenant is £4k better off thanks to an alert from a member of staff. Christine Wigham identified that the tenant was not receiving attendance allowance, which she was entitled to. Unauthorised bonfires to be removed – 20 October 2010 Chorley Guardian UNAUTHORISED bonfires will be removed in the run-up to November 5.CCH and Chorley Borough Council are working together to remove unauthorised bonfires built on public land and will be holding a skip day so people can get rid of unwanted rubbish. Drug dealer evicted – 20 October 2010 Chorley Guardian A convicted drug dealer has been evicted. Clive Unsworth was ordered by the courts to hand over possession of his two bedroom flat in Gordon Street, Chorley. Unsworth handed the keys over to Chorley Community Housing without fuss. Rent dodgers face eviction – 13 October 2010 Chorley Guardian TENANTS in Chorley who don't pay their rents face being evicted. Chorley Community Housing served papers of 16 tenants in September and say they’ll be stepping up their efforts to recover arrears of £500,000. Citizens protest against affordable housing – 13 October 2010 Chorley Guardian Approx 600 residents have protested against plans to build 24 affordable homes between Chorley and Leyland. AHA and Seddon Homes have submitted an application which could see 10 two-bedroom and 14 three-bedroom properties built on land in Moor Road, Croston. Citizens protest against affordable housing – 6 October 2010 Chorley Citizen The circus came to town for children living in Coppull as they learned how to juggle and walk on stilts as part of a programme of activities at the Longfield Avenue Community Hub. The sessions were organised by CCH ranged from circus skills training through to cookery classes. Improving prospects – 07 October 2010 Leigh Journal AHA has set up a scheme to improve the chance of young people finding work. Adactus Young Unemployed Persons Package (AYUPP) has been set up in Wigan where the association has local hostels. The project launched in October and forms part of AHA’s ‘breathe’ regeneration initiative. Violent man kicked out of home is legal ‘first’ – 06 October 2010 Chorley Guardian A man who threatened his wife with a knife has been forced out of her home. CCH took legal action to temporarily remove the violent partner to protect her, her child and the neighbours. The action was taken following numerous complaints from neighbours. Circus comes to town – 06 October 2010 Chorley Guardian The circus has come to town for children living in Longfield Avenue in Coppull. CCH has organised the session throughout October to teach children how to juggle, walk on stilts and many other tricks. Eaves Green community activity – 06 October 2010 Chorley Guardian Eaves Green residents’ Association has received a £1,000 award of cash from CCH. The funds will be used to organise more outings for older residents and activities for young people in the area. Grot spot’s bright new look – 30 September 2010 Bootle Times A Bootle grot spot has been transformed thanks to an innovative community project for local young people. Boyfriend is banned from family home – 30 September 2010 Lancashire Evening Post CCH has taken legal action to temporarily remove the violent partner of one of its tenants. CCH took the decision to protect the tenant following neighbour complaints on his behaviour. Children’s picnic and sports area set to become estate – 29 September 2010 Lancashire Evening Post Residents from Acresfield, Park Road and the surrounding area are campaigning against Adactus’s plans to build new homes on a plot of land behind their homes. In the space of a week the Breathe+ ‘stay and paint’ project saw more than 70 young people paint the hoardings that surround a demolition site in Klondyke. Up for the challenge – 29 September 2010 Chorley Guardian Staff from CCH took part in the Annual Chorley Mayor’s Corporate Challenge on Sunday September 19 and romped home with the first prize for the fastest team. Make your bid – 29 September 2010 Chorley Guardian Tenants of CCH can get their hands on £50,000 to pay for improvements in their area. Bids had to be submitted by the end of September. How does your garden grow? – 29 September 2010 Chorley Guardian CCH have offered tenants in Longfield Av, Coppull, watering cans to help them maintain their gardens and newly laid lawns. The gardens were provide to the 60s built homes as part of CCH’s £250k improvement programme. Save our playing fields – 29 September 2010 Chorley Guardian Residents from Acresfield, Park Road and the surrounding area are objecting to the proposed plans of Adactus to build new homes on a plot of land behind their homes. Regenerated home is left smashed up – 28 September 2010 Lancashire Evening Post A property that has just benefited from major refurbishment works through CCH’s investment programme has been broken into and vandalised. The damage to the property on Wright Street is estimated to over £5000. Fire leaves boy’s room destroyed – 22 September 2010 Lancashire Evening Post A fire at a house on Harestone Avenue has destroyed a child’s bedroom. There was no one in the house when the fire started and there were no injuries. The Police are investigating what could have cause the blaze. Prize delight for gardeners – 22 September 2010 Chorley Citizen Chorley tenants were rewarded for their outdoor imagination and flair when the results were announced in CCH’s annual gardening competition. Moving tribute to ‘perfect mum’ – 22 September 2010 Chorley Guardian The grown-up sons of a Chorley and Leyland community worker who died of cancer have paid tribute to a ‘perfect mum’. Ann James, 71 one of the founding members of CCH died on 6 September 2010. Chorley tenant group is £3000 better off – 22 September 2010 Chorley Guardian Mr and Mrs Taylor of St Gregory’s Place, Chorley are the proud winners of the CCH 2010 Gardening Competition. This is the second year CCH have been running this competition that is proving increasingly popular amongst residents. Chorley tenant group is £3000 better off – 22 September 2010 Chorley Guardian The ACM resident’s group from Coppull has been awarded £3000 cash from CCH, to invest in a project to encourage residents in the area to grow their own food. Ex-Chorley housing chair dies aged 71 – 17 September 2010 Inside Housing Ann James who led CCH has died on 6 September after a battle with cancer. Ann was the Chair of CCH since March 2007. Housing Chief Ann dies – 15 September 2010 Chorley Citizen Tributes have been paid to a ‘tireless community champion’ and founding chair of CCH, who died on 6 September. Tributes paid to Ann James – 15 September 2010 Chorley Guardian Ann, the Chair of CCH since March 2007 has died on 6 September after a battle with cancer. 2000th home revamped – 15 September 2010 Chorley Guardian Chorley Community Housing has reached the landmark of 2000 home improvements. The 2000 homes has received new bathrooms and kitchens in two years. Cash boost – 15 September 2010 Bootle Times Plans for a ports project designed to reduce youth nuisance on the streets of Chorley have received a boost thanks to a cash grant £20,000 from CCH’s community fund. Junior bobbies on the beat – 08 September 2010 Bootle Times AHA tenants can submit applications to try and win funds for local projects. A panel of tenants will decide where the funds from the £17,000 pot are awarded. Projects can include anything for tidying up local grot spots to installing security lights. Junior bobbies on the beat – 08 September 2010 Chorley Guardian CCH in partnership with local PCSO’s in Chorley Moor are keeping youngsters busy over the summer holidays under the “Junior Bobbies” scheme. The PCSO’s take the youngsters out with them for one morning per week. The children also get an opportunity to work with other services the PCSO’s work with including the Fire Brigade. Arcon House refurbishment – 08 September 2010 Chorley Guardian CCH allowed residents to view the recently refurbished Arcon House in Coppull. Residents from The Willows scheme that could not be adapted or refurbished in the same way, are now getting the opportunity to move into this new scheme instead. Green-fingered group’s joy – 08 September 2010 Chorley Guardian Residents from the Apiery in Bretherton were delighted to be awarded £250 from CCH’s green grants. The money was spent to provide a new seating area for residents. Strict rules on pets for all new tenants – 08 September 2010 Chorley Guardian Tenants of CCH are being consulted on a new tenancy agreement. The new agreement will give CCH the power to take quicker action on tenants involved in ASB or even keeping pets without permission. Hols on hold for big clean – 01 September 2010 Chorley Guardian CCH has announced changes to its Board of management with Pail Joyce replacing Ann James as Chair and CCH tenant Beverly Figaji joining the Board. Hols on hold for big clean – 01 September 2010 Chorley Citizen Four women from Longfield Avenue, Coppull are celebrating after winning their estate’s first ever gardening competition. The gardening competition was started by CCH that have recently completed a £250,000 refurbishment of the estate. Hols on hold for big clean – 01 September 2010 Chorley Citizen It was all hands to the pumps when residents took time during the school holidays to clean up the Longfield Avenue estate in Coppull. Over 30 residents joined CCH staff to tidy up the estate that has recently received a £250,000 revamp. Never too young – 01 September 2010 Chorley Citizen Over 30 residents turned up to join staff from CCH on a Clean Up event organised at the Longfield Avenue estate in Coppull. The estate has recently received a £250,000 revamp. Housing association tackles ‘ASB menace’ – 27 August 2010 Southport visitor Adactus has stepped up their efforts to clamp down on Anti Social Behaviour. Over £100,000 will be invested to tackle ASB during the year. The specialist team set up has already had numerous successes already, and the latest in Bootle includes action taken against a parent following the numerous complaints received for his daughter’s behaviour upsetting neighbours. Legal threat – 26 August 2010 Bootle Times Further coverage on Adactus’s increased efforts to clamp down on Anti Social Behaviour. Over £100,000 will be invested to tackle ASB during the year. The specialist ASB team, has recently taken action in Bootle against a parent after numerous complaints were made for his daughter’s behaviour upsetting neighbours. Junior bobbies on the beat – 26 August 2010 Chorley Guardian CCH in partnership with local PCSO’s in Chorley Moor has launched the “Junior Bobbies” scheme to keep youngsters busy over the summer holidays. The PCSO’s took the youngsters out with them for one morning per week. The children also got an opportunity to work with other services the PCSO’s work with including the Fire Brigade. Affordable homes help people get on property ladder – 26 August 2010 Chorley Citizen 11 affordable homes have been built as part of a new housing estate called the Meadows on the site of the former Wagon and Horses pub in Chapel Lane, Coppull. The two bedroom houses are available under CCH’s rent to homebuy scheme. Low cost homes at former pub site – 25 August 2010 Chorley Guardian CCH has developed 11 new affordable homes which form part of ‘the Meadows’ a new housing estate on the site of the former Wagon and Horses pub in Chapel Lane, Coppull. The houses are available under CCH’s rent to homebuy scheme. CCH helps Magpies feather nest – 25 August 2010 Chorley Citizen Chorley FC has landed another major financial baker, as CCH have pledged £1,000 to the magpies for this season. We don’t want cheap homes in the village – 25 August 2010 Chorley Guardian Residents in Croston have expressed their concerns over a planning application submitted by CCH to develop 24 new homes on Moor Road. Residents are worried that following the development of the homes traffic will increase in the village. Youngsters get taste of life on the beat – 25 August 2010 Chorley Citizen CCH in partnership with local PCSO’s in Chorley Moor has launched the “Junior Bobbies” scheme to keep youngsters busy over the summer holidays. The PCSO’s took the youngsters out with them for one morning per week. The children got an opportunity to also visit the stables and try out police uniforms. Special lunch – 25 August 2010 Chorley Guardian In a bid to help tenants manage their money and protect their belongings, CCH have committed £1500 towards the production of an information video. The video will be produced with the help of the residents and will offer tips from opening a bank account to arranging home contents insurance. Special lunch – 25 August 2010 Chorley Guardian CCH tenants have been treated to a special lunch after having their home refurbished. CCH in partnership with Bullock hosted the hotpot lunch to meet the residents and get some feedback on the refurbishment work. We don’t want cheap homes in the village – 23 August 2010 Lancashire Evening Post Further coverage from Croston residents that have expressed concerns over a planning application submitted by CCH to develop 24 new homes on Moor Road. Their worries are on potential increased traffic through the village. Have a go at growing herbs – 19 August 2010 Chorley Citizen With plans to clamp down on Anti Social Behaviour Adactus have vowed to invest over £100,000 during the year. The specialist team set up has already had numerous successes already, but with the extra funds it will be easier to tackle more complex cases. Have a go at growing herbs – 18 August 2010 Chorley Citizen CCH residents are called to help create a herb garden at the Chorley Moor Community House on Liptrott Road as part of a Clean-up day. The event forms part of the Lancashire Wildlife Trust’s community food growing project. Tenants invited to an away day – 18 August 2010 Chorley Citizen CCH tenants are invited to the 2010 Annual Residents Conference. The Residents Conference will bring residents across the Group together to work with staff in shaping the future direction of the organisation. Housing conference raffle prizes – 18 August 2010 Chorley Guardian Staff from across the group bought tickets to take part in a raffle organised by CCH testing their knowledge in football. £100 was raised and was donated to Chorley Help The Homeless. Tenants to shape future – 18 August 2010 Chorley Guardian CCH tenants have been invited to attend the 2010 Annual Residents Conference with other tenants from the Group. The Residents Conference will bring residents together to help shape the future of the organisation. Grounded: new job – 18 August 2010 Chorley Citizen Andrew Thomasson has secured a full time position with Chorley Community Housing after impressing everyone with his six months’ work as a trainee in grounds maintenance. Adactus Chief Executive Paul, congratulated Andrew in a ceremony held at Turner House. Changes afoot for tenants – 18 August 2010 Chorley Guardian Tenants from Pall Mall, Chorley now have a brighter future looking outside their kitchen window after getting a £250 green grant from CCH. The money was spent to brighten up the rear of their flats with an array of plants and flowers. Changes afoot for tenants – 18 August 2010 Chorley Guardian CCH informed tenants how the changes in housing following the government’s reforms on housing benefit and tenancy rules could affect them. Help create herb garden – 18 August 2010 Chorley Guardian Chorley residents were called on to help create a herb garden at the Chorley Moor Community House on Liptrott Road as part of a Clean-up day. CCH gardening competition – 11 August 2010 Chorley Guardian While judging on the CCH gardening competition was already underway, some of the many submissions were already looking as favourites to win. The garden of Joan Charnley in Chatham Place, Eaves Green had already caught the judges eye. Colourful future – 11 August 2010 Chorley Guardian CCH tenants at Pall Mall, Chorley now have a brighter future following a £250 green grant from their landlord. The money was spent to brighten up the rear of their flats with an array of plants and flowers. Dark Ages theme at Gin Pit – 05 August 2010 Leigh Journal A Saxon, Norman, Celtic and Viking re-enactment invasion took place in Gin Pit Village. Visitors got a chance to get a glance at the dark ages and also a birds of prey display. Young arm of the law – 04 August 2010 Chorley Guardian Additional coverage on the CCH partnership with local PCSO’s in Chorley Moor and the launch of the “Junior Bobbies” scheme to keep youngsters busy over the summer holidays. The PCSO’s took the youngsters out with them for one morning per week. The children got an opportunity to also visit the stables and try out police uniforms. Baby threat tenant shamed – 28 July 2010 Chorley Guardian CCH has taken swift action to gain an injunction against a 24 year old woman in Longfield Avenue, Coppull to prevent her from threatening and verbally abusing her neighbours. The woman ignored previous warnings about her behaviour and made cruel threats towards a pregnant neighbour. ‘Baby threat’ tenant action – 28 July 2010 Chorley Citizen Following customer complaints, CCH took swift action to gain an injunction against an abusive woman in Longfield Avenue, Coppull. This should help protect the neighbourhood from the perpetrator’s threats and verbal abuse. Old pub site is born again – 21July 2010 Chorley Citizen Adactus Housing has started the development of 19 new homes on the site of a pub that lay derelict for years. The new homes at Botany Brow in Chorley, which include 12 houses and seven flats, will be managed by CCH.