1

Making Places Work

Future directions for the role of

Housing Associations

in Community Regeneration in Scotland

Colin Armstrong Nick Hopkins

Housing & Regeneration Consultant Nick Hopkins Consulting

2

Contents

Executive Summary 4

1. Introduction 11

2. Methodology 13

3. The Rationale for Broader Action on Community 15 Regeneration

4. Policy Context 19

5. Analysis of Communities Scotland Wider Role Funding 43

6. Research with Housing Associations and Regeneration 46

Stakeholders

7. Conclusions and Recommendations 84

Annex 1: Acknowledgements 90

Annex 2: Copy of Scorecard Surveys 91

3

Foreword Scotland’s Housing Associations have a long and proud tradition of being “more than

just landlords”. Through their increasing involvement in wider role and social enterprise activities over recent years, housing associations right across the country

can be seen making an increasingly important contribution to Scotland’s social and economic wellbeing.

At a time of unprecedented change for the sector, the report highlights the diverse activities that the housing association sector is already involved in and presents a

range of challenging messages which all of us working in the sector need to take on board, as well as suggestions of pathways we may wish to consider in terms of going forward together.

Jacqui Watt Chief Executive, SFHA

4

Executive Summary This study has been carried out in response to a brief issued by the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations and funded by Communities Scotland. The study explores how the housing association sector is going beyond the development, provision and management of housing to contribute more broadly to community regeneration. In particular it considers the sector’s views on its involvement in ‘wider role’ activity; the provision of support for social enterprises; the promotion of community empowerment and involvement in community planning; and explores how such activity is perceived by other regeneration stakeholders. The study goes on to discuss the ambitions the sector has for deeper engagement in community regeneration, the barriers to this and the potential role of the SFHA and others in meeting these challenges Methodology This study involved:

• A review of current policy developments in Scotland in terms of their overall direction, community regeneration, housing, ‘wider role’, social enterprise promotion, community empowerment and community planning. This was complemented by a brief review of policy and trends in English housing and regeneration policy.

• Setting out a clear rationale for the involvement of housing associations in broader community regeneration activity.

• A review of the operation of the National Housing Federation’s InBiz initiative. • Primary research with senior staff working in the housing association movement and for other regeneration stakeholders through:

o Face to face and phone interviews. o Two focus groups. o Completion of an online survey by a wider group of respondents.

Policy Developments

• There is a now an explicit focus on sustainable economic development as the overarching purpose of the Scottish Government, set out within its Economic Strategy.

• There is more emphasis on the devolution of power to local authorities and community planning partnerships as evidenced by the large scale removal of ring fencing from funding and the Concordat between the Scottish Government and local government.

• Firm Foundations, the Scottish Government’s consultation paper on housing, stresses the need to grow and continue to improve the social housing stock in Scotland, but proposes more flexibility in how this will be delivered.

• The Scottish Government’s developing agenda on tackling poverty, inequality and deprivation aims to focus more sharply on early intervention and tackling the causes of poverty.

• A key overarching theme of policy development is the need for more efficient use of public funding.

• Wider Role will continue to be an important aspect of the Scottish Government’s community regeneration policy. Dedicated funding will continue for the next three years, but the operation and purpose of wider role will be reviewed in 2008 in the light of the broader developments in policy discussed above.

• The Scottish Government wishes to see the social enterprise sector grow and play an increased role, particularly in areas such as promoting employability,

5

supporting this with additional funding and through the Concordat with local government.

• The Scottish Government is interested in the further empowerment of communities as a key part of community regeneration. It is considering how communities might become involved in the management of resources, the scrutiny of decisions made by others and the delegation of decision making to communities themselves.

• Community planning remains the major mechanism for driving joint working, rationalisation and improvements in public services at the local level. Connecting local and national priorities and promoting community engagement are key elements in this process. Community Planning Partnerships will have greater local discretion within the framework of simpler Single Outcome Agreements with central government.

• English policy shows a number of similar trends, with enhanced local control through Local Strategic Partnerships and a clear recognition of the broader role of housing associations in community regeneration. This is reflected in the work of the Housing Corporation and in the creation of a new agency to succeed it, the Housing and Communities Agency.

• The National Housing Federation launched its In Business for Neighbourhoods (InBiz) initiative in 2003, which seeks to promote the role of housing associations in delivering sustainable communities, through the use of a national brand, a dedicated website and print publications and the requirement for members to sign up to a clear statement of their commitment to deliver more effectively for their tenants and communities.

Rationale for Broader Involvement in Community Regeneration

• Housing associations are social enterprises, delivering social goals through business means.

• There is a strong business case for their wider involvement in community regeneration, based on the financial and organisational benefits of doing so.

• There is similarly a strong social case for housing associations becoming involved in community regeneration. This is based on the needs of tenants, who are often disadvantaged and on the ability of housing associations to take effective action to address those needs. Housing Associations are able to act as community anchors, trusted intermediaries and creative contractors by drawing on their financial, organisational, human resource and relationship assets.

• These assets and housing associations’ ability to play these broader roles suggest that other regeneration stakeholders should regard housing associations as central partners in the delivery of their objectives.

Research Findings Involvement in Wider Role Activity

• Housing associations are involved in a very broad range of wider role activity, in particular in securing funding for such work and in its direct delivery. They also act as trusted intermediaries and provide direct funding for such work, but to a lesser extent.

• There is reasonable awareness of this work from other regeneration stakeholders contacted as part of this study, but a strong feeling that this awareness was not evenly distributed within in the community regeneration sector.

• Housing associations seem generally to progress most of their wider role work through designated members of staff, although most associations who took part in the study were trying to develop a ‘whole organisation’ approach.

6

• There is some partnership working between associations in delivering wider role activity.

• Both housing associations and other regeneration stakeholders are keen to see the sector’s engagement expand further in the future.

• Most housing associations placed more emphasis on the social than the business case for wider role.

• Barriers to expanding involvement include funding, capacity issues within the sector, policy change, regulatory issues, concerns about community planning and internal attitudes within the sector. Other regeneration stakeholders are more concerned by those internal barriers.

• Overcoming the barriers will involve the sector making a clearer offer to other regeneration stakeholders. This needs to involve the provision of capacity building support, the creation of better opportunities for networking for the sector, and the building of strategic alliances within the sector and with other regeneration stakeholders.

Promoting Social Enterprise

• Housing associations are themselves social enterprises and are increasingly defining themselves as such.

• Housing associations’ involvement in promoting social enterprise is lower than it is in delivering wider role activity.

• Some associations are, however, involved in contracting with social enterprises and the provision of management and governance support.

• Support is being provided not only to external social enterprises, but also to social enterprises that sit within housing associations’ own structures. Associations sometimes establish social enterprise subsidiaries as a permanent part of their business, or they may float them off as independent organisations.

• The social enterprise sector is reasonably well-aware of housing associations’ activity in the field, but other community regeneration stakeholders have a poor understanding.

• Housing associations usually support social enterprises because there is a good social case for doing so. Support is often provided by the same staff who deliver wider role work.

• Housing associations have a clear ambition to become more involved in the promotion of social enterprise in the future.

• Other regeneration stakeholders are similarly keen to see this involvement expand.

• The barriers to housing associations expanding their social enterprise activity are considered to be time, the risks involved, organisational inertia and their own view of their organisational purpose.

• Overcoming these barriers may involve the development of good practice examples, work to support the more effective demonstration of added value, a national policy statement linking social enterprises and housing associations and a soft loan fund to reduce risk.

Community Empowerment

• Many housing associations think community empowerment is central to what they do.

• Current involvement includes building the skills and confidence of activists, assisting communities in exercising power and promoting broad based participation.

• Involvement is often driven by the need to get communities involved in major regeneration projects.

7

• There was not a good understanding amongst other regeneration stakeholders of housing associations’ involvement in community empowerment that extended beyond their traditional housing role.

• Housing associations are keen to do more community empowerment work in the future.

• The expectation that associations will become more involved was held by other regeneration stakeholders responding to the on line survey, though much less so by regeneration stakeholder interviewees.

• Barriers to involvement include the general challenges in effectively involving communities, local politics, attitudes within the housing association sector, the challenges to national/ regional associations of establishing a local presence and divisions within communities. There were concerns from other regeneration stakeholders that involvement with community empowerment might conflict with the work of others in this field, for example Community Planning Partnerships.

• Overcoming these barriers will involve the creation of good practice advice, as well as a clear commitment from housing associations to get more involved.

Community Planning

• There is a mixed picture in terms of housing associations’ involvement in community planning processes.

• There is generally little or no involvement of housing associations on Community Planning Partnership boards. Some associations are participating in sub groups of Community Planning Partnerships; others have no involvement at all with any part of Community Planning structures.

• Associations are keen to get more involved in Community Planning in the future.

• The dominance by local authorities of the agenda and work of Community Planning Partnerships is seen as a significant barrier by some housing associations.

• Previously Communities Scotland was seen by many stakeholders as representing housing associations on Community Planning Partnerships, alongside its more general oversight role. This may have inhibited the more direct engagement of housing associations in the past and the abolition of Communities Scotland now leaves a representational vacuum.

• Other community regeneration stakeholders are more likely to see the lack of involvement of housing associations in Community Planning Partnerships as a result of the inevitable challenges for any third sector organisation in becoming involved, given the huge numbers of organisations within the sector.

• Overcoming these barriers will require a willingness from housing associations to work with one another, and possibly with other parts of the third sector, to secure coherent joint representation within Community Planning Partnership structures.

Supporting the Sector’s Further Development

• Housing associations welcome the SFHA’s desire to support the greater engagement of the sector in community regeneration. They suggest that SFHA’s focus should remain sharply on supporting their membership and working nationally to create the conditions for more effective operation at a local level.

• There is some support for an initiative focused on developing the broader role of housing associations in community regeneration and in raising awareness of that role that includes

o An identifiable brand or strapline.

8

o The creation of web based resources. o Development of a public statement supporting greater involvement in community regeneration to which associations can sign up.

• There may be specific challenges in designing an initiative which can meet the needs of both the housing association and the broader community regeneration sector.

• Consideration should also be given to the development of better training in wider community regeneration involvement, more opportunities to network on the issues and a research agenda generating a more coherent body of evidence on best practice.

Conclusions and Recommendations There is a clear and important role for housing associations in the future of community regeneration in Scotland. Commitment and awareness of this role is shared across the housing association sector and its partners and by the Scottish Government. It should however, still be recognised that:

• There was a consensus that associations’ primary role should continue to be development, management and maintenance of housing.

• The overall level of non-housing resources invested in community regeneration through housing associations remains small and a minority of housing associations do not think community regeneration will be part of their business.

• “Firm Foundations” poses significant challenges for housing associations’ basic functions and therefore it is asking a lot of the sector to find additional time and energy to drive forward its engagement in community regeneration at the same time.

We have made a number of recommendations, dividing them between those targeted at housing associations and other partners at the local level and those targeted at the SFHA and others at the national level. Local Level Housing associations must use community regeneration activity to become more efficient in the delivery of their other functions and more effective and efficient in the delivery of community regeneration activity. Many housing associations consider themselves to be social enterprises and some have social enterprise subsidiaries. There is an appetite within the sector to do more to support social enterprise and a favourable policy context at local and national level. 1. Housing associations should examine the scope for pooling community regeneration resources amongst themselves or with other organisations. The SFHA, perhaps in conjunction with representative organisations from the third and social enterprise sectors, could broker such arrangements.

2. There are a number of forums across Scotland where housing associations are currently coming together to share information on Wider Role and other topics. These forums could play a key role in helping facilitate Recommendation 1, particularly if they sharply focus on sharing good practice, information and resources.

3. Housing associations that wish to expand their social enterprise work should use the opportunities provided by the concordat to proactively approach social enterprises, local authorities, Community Planning Partnerships (see

9

Recommendation 5) and Local Social Economy Partnerships to explore opportunities for joint working.

Housing associations have a history of effectively involving communities and the potential to increase their role in this area in the future, subject to its fit with other community engagement work. 4. Housing associations should carefully consider how best to become involved in community engagement or empowerment beyond their role as a landlord.

The Scottish Government is actively promoting the devolution of power to the local level, underpinned by the Concordat with local government. Housing associations, in common with many third sector organisations, are struggling to get involved in community planning structures and it will be impossible to involve all those locally in relevant structures. In the new political climate it is clear that, for the benefit of the communities they serve, and for their own purposes, housing associations must be capable of engaging in strategic relationships with the local authorities. 5. Housing associations at the local authority level should make greater efforts to act jointly with one another, and potentially with other third sector organisations, to gain representation for their sector within Community Planning Partnerships and on other relevant forums.

6. Housing associations should articulate (preferably collectively) a clear and simple offer to Community Planning Partnerships on the contribution they can make to formulating and delivering Community Planning Partnership priorities. The nature of that offer will be dictated by local circumstances and the particular priorities of each Community Planning Partnership.

National Level The housing association movement has a clear ‘offer’ to make to other stakeholders in contributing to community regeneration grounded in its financial, organisational, human resource and relationship assets. Although there is a growing understanding of this potential contribution within the Scottish Government, there is a need to better articulate this offer to other regeneration stakeholders and within the housing association movement itself. 7. The SFHA should work with the Scottish Government to ensure that all its policy documents in relation to community regeneration, social enterprise development, community empowerment and community planning clearly articulate the potential role of housing associations in delivering their objectives.

8. In particular, the SFHA should work with the Scottish Government on the proposed further strategic review of the Wider Role Fund to ensure that the unique contribution that housing associations can make is fully recognised and supported.

9. The SFHA should work with CoSLA and the Improvement Service to explore how this offer can be better promoted to local authorities and Community Planning Partnerships.

10.The SFHA should work through the Scottish Government, CoSLA, SCVO, social enterprise networks and their own members to disseminate a clear understanding of the role of housing associations as community anchors to a broader range of stakeholders.

This study has highlighted considerable concerns within the housing association sector about its capacity to become more widely involved in community regeneration through

10

wider role and in the reduction of resources available to support generic development work. 11.The SFHA should work with the Scottish Government to consider how housing associations might be best supported to increase the capacity and skills of their organisations and staff to more effectively and efficiently deliver community regeneration outcomes.

It can be difficult to demonstrate the added value of housing associations’ engagement in community regeneration. There is widespread interest in the development of more systematic and consistent monitoring and evaluation frameworks for community regeneration that would capture not only the narrow inputs and outputs of project work, but also the wider social, economic and environmental benefits. 12.The SFHA and the Scottish Government should support the development of ‘social accounting’ or ‘social return on investment’ models for measuring the performance and reporting on wider role, social enterprise and community empowerment projects.

Housing associations are often restricted in their ability to devote increased resources to community regeneration by a concern that there is not a business return on such work. 13.The SFHA and the Scottish Government should support the further development of the models outlined above to ensure that they encompass effective mechanisms for auditing the business impact of such engagement, i.e. the impact on organisational effectiveness and on business performance on issues such as rent arrears and tenancy turnover.

There was a mixed response to the idea of creating an inBiz initiative for Scotland. Many respondents saw a clear benefit in the idea of a brand, website and public statements of commitment, others were less certain. Any campaign would only succeed if it was properly resourced and if it enjoyed widespread support from housing associations. It was also clear that respondents felt a replication of InBiz would not encompass all the elements of support for enhanced involvement in community regeneration that would be welcomed by the housing association sector, such as opportunities for sharing good practice and training. 14. The SFHA should work closely with its members and national and local partner organisations to carry out a detailed examination of how training, networking opportunities and good practice advice relating to the sector’s role in community regeneration can be provided at a national and local level. Alongside this, the SFHA should identify appropriate campaigns to promote the diverse work of the housing association sector in developing and maintaining successful, sustainable neighbourhoods across Scotland.

11

1. Introduction 1.1. This report presents the findings of a study of Scottish housing associations’ involvement in community regeneration. The study was commissioned by the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations (SFHA) and was conducted between January and March 2008. Aims and Objectives

1.2. The aims of the study were set out in the project brief: � To identify opportunities for the sector to make an enhanced contribution to achieving the Scottish Government’s community regeneration objectives, including:

o Demonstrating how housing associations are involved in Wider Role and the promotion of Social Enterprise activity across Scotland

o Exploring how housing associations can better engage with Community Planning Partnerships in the delivery of mutual objectives.

o Exploring how housing associations can improve their contribution to delivering the community empowerment agenda in the areas they serve.

o Considering whether housing associations are well-placed to become Community Anchor Organisations.

o Analysing how housing associations can demonstrate to Councils the ways in which they add value to regeneration and community planning.

o Focusing on how housing associations can build their capacity to achieve the above objectives.

� To assess whether the SFHA should look to establish an initiative to promote the involvement of the housing association sector in community regeneration, reflecting some of the practice of, and lessons learned by, the National Housing Federation’s In Business for Neighbourhoods initiative (InBiz).

1.3. The study was not an attempt to evaluate the Wider Role programme. Communities Scotland has recently published such an evaluation1 and it was recognised that there would be little value in repeating that work. 1.4. This study comes at an important time for housing associations engaging in community regeneration. Considerable changes are happening in the regeneration and housing worlds, with recent and current consultations on several new policy statements in the field suggesting the potential for new directions of travel that will create both challenges and opportunities for the sector. 1.5. This study takes a broader view on housing associations’ role in promoting community regeneration than their contribution through ‘wider role’ activity. However, one of its key drivers has been the Scottish Government’s commitment to make dedicated funding available for wider role in the three financial years beginning 2008/09 and their commitment to reviewing this year how that funding should be used. 1.6. There was considerable relief from the housing association sector that the Wider Role fund has survived the demise of Communities Scotland and the new budget settlement. The sector now faces the challenge of proving beyond doubt that the Wider Role Fund is an appropriate use of public money. It also needs to make a clear

1 Evaluation of the Wider Role Funding Programme, Communities Scotland, Precis 115, Research Report 97, Communities Scotland 2008

12

case to its regeneration partners that housing associations’ wider role work can make a unique contribution to the achievement of their own regeneration objectives to ensure that this activity dovetails with local regeneration strategies, continues to attract match funding and is sustainable in the long term, 1.7. The sector faces similar challenges persuading regeneration partners that it has a valuable contribution to make in social enterprise, community empowerment and in Community Planning. 1.8. The SFHA exists to influence the direction of national policy on behalf its membership and to support and promote the development of its members as effective organisations, delivering quality outcomes for the tenants and communities that they serve. 1.9. This report reflects that mission. We hope it will make a contribution to improving all stakeholders’ understanding of housing associations’ contribution to community regeneration and that our recommendations will help the SFHA and others to develop their own work in supporting housing associations’ delivery in this field.

13

2. Methodology 2.1. We followed a four-stage process to complete this report. This involved:

• An inception meeting • Desk-based research • Original research • Statistical analysis of grant approval data

Inception Meeting

2.2. The inception meeting with the client was used to: • Confirm that the methodology set out within the initial proposal was appropriate.

• Clarify and agree the relative emphasis on different parts of the work. • Discuss the stakeholders to be engaged and potential sources of best practice information.

• Agree the work programme. Desk Based Research 2.3. The study scanned the policy environment and relevant research literature to map out the current context within which housing associations are operating and to highlight the key issues that stakeholders need to consider as they move forward. 2.4. This focused on:

• evolution of the relevant policy framework in Scotland, with particular emphasis on changes since the election of the Scottish Government in May 2007;

• the developing policy agenda for wider role, social enterprise, community empowerment and community planning;

• comparison with the developing English policy agenda; • The National Housing Federation’s InBiz Initiative. • An update for the financial year 2006/07 of the analysis of the grant approval data from Communities Scotland for the Wider Role Fund contained within the recent evaluation of Wider Role.2

Original Research 2.5. Original research was carried out using face to face and phone based interviews, focus groups and an online survey. 2.6. Two sets of stakeholders were targeted: housing associations themselves and a variety of stakeholders involved in the delivery of community regeneration activity at a local and national level. 2.7. In total 28 face-to-face and telephone interviews were carried out (see Annex 1):

• Ten with housing association staff • Four with Scottish Government civil servants • Four with Community Planning Partnerships • Nine with other regeneration stakeholders • One each with representatives of the Housing Corporation and the National Housing Federation.

2 Evaluation of the Wider Role Funding Programme, Communities Scotland, Precis 115, Research Report 97, Communities Scotland 2008

14

2.8. Meetings of SFHA’s East and West of Scotland Wider Role Forums were used as focus groups to allow a wider range of housing associations to make a contribution to the study. 2.9. The Rocket Science Scorecard, an online survey tool, was used to garner the views of a wider range of stakeholders. The scorecard is designed to convert respondents’ qualitative perceptions into quantitative scores, allowing comparisons to be made between different groups and the accurate pinpointing of key issues. It works by providing specific numbered statements for respondents to agree with, reducing the level of subjectivity involved. 2.10. Two Scorecards were developed. The first was targeted at housing associations. Emails were sent to the Chief Executives and Directors of all housing associations that are members of the SFHA, inviting them to follow a web link to the scorecard. There were 57 completed responses. 2.11. The second scorecard was targeted at other regeneration stakeholders and distributed to the mailing list of the Scottish Urban Regeneration Forum, the Councils for Voluntary Service (CVS) network and all 32 Community Planning Partnerships. In total a further 94 regeneration stakeholder completed the Scorecard, 2.12. A copy of the scorecards can be found at Annex 2. They covered the same basic range of issues, although from the different perspectives of the respondents. The scorecard for housing associations contained a small number of additional questions.

15

3. The Rationale for Broader Action on Community

Regeneration

3.1.1. Housing associations across Scotland, and their counterparts elsewhere in the UK, have become ever more involved in the planning and delivery of community regeneration through ‘wider role’ work, the promotion of social enterprise and the enabling of community empowerment. 3.1.2. However, the rationale for housing association involvement in regeneration beyond their core housing role has not always been clearly expressed, either within the housing association movement, or by the movement in its engagement with other regeneration stakeholders. 3.1.3. There are two key challenges to which the housing association sector must be able to respond when considering engagement in community regeneration.

• From within the sector and from funders comes the challenge to justify why associations should not simply focus on their ‘core’ business, of delivering housing investment and management as effectively as they can, particularly when they are faced with increasing cost and efficiency pressures and a host of other pressing problems.

• From other regeneration stakeholders comes the challenge to justify why they should engage with, and provide financial support to, housing associations to promote community regeneration. Can housing associations help them deliver on their objectives as, or more, effectively and efficiently than other partners?

3.1.4. The response to the former challenge begins by understanding the nature of housing associations as social enterprises, which seek to achieve social outcomes through business means. This nature suggests that there are both business and social cases for associations to go beyond bricks and mortar in ‘making places work’. 3.2. The Business Case for Involvement in Community Regeneration 3.2.1. As businesses, housing associations must maintain demand for their services, control their operating costs and business risks effectively, ensure that they receive full payment for their services, take appropriate opportunities for growth and maintain positive relationships with their stakeholders. 3.2.2. The main challenges to housing associations achieving these outcomes come from the social and economic difficulties facing the people and communities that they serve. Engaging in wider community regeneration activity can help to address those difficulties. 3.2.3. More explicitly the main business risks, costs and challenges for housing associations in the context of an increasingly residualised sector can be seen as follows:

• Maintaining the demand for stock which may be in poor condition, sit in environmentally poor quality neighbourhoods, or be highly stigmatised amongst current and potential tenants.

• Controlling rent arrears amongst a tenant population increasingly likely to be on low incomes, unemployed or insecurely employed and experiencing problematic debt.

• Controlling tenancy turnover resulting from eviction (often as a result of rent arrears) and abandonment, that is often associated with tenant vulnerability. Turnover has a heavy financial and organisational/ staffing cost, as well as

16

having a strongly negative impact by further fragmenting a community and reducing housing demand.

• Addressing high levels of anti-social behaviour within a community, is not only expensive in terms of staff time and other costs, but is also a major factor in stigmatisation, tenancy turnover and reduced demand.

• Maintaining relationships and establishing a positive reputation with other partners with control over development funding, access to land etc.

• Making major investments in new developments or refurbishment projects, money that is wasted if the neighbourhoods and communities invested in do not ultimately function properly.

3.2.4. The essence of the business case is that playing a wider role in community regeneration is not a distraction from an association’s ‘core’ business as a social landlord. On the contrary, it is an essential part of effectively delivering on those ‘core’ objectives. 3.2.5. The housing association sector has developed a strong track record in using community regeneration activity to tackle each of these business risks:

• Social enterprises have been engaged to provide job opportunities for local people and high quality environmental maintenance services.

• Cultural activities have been supported to break down barriers between local residents and create a sense of neighbourliness.

• Financial inclusion activities have been targeted at poverty. For example the provision money or welfare rights advice, improving access to financial services and the development of financial capability amongst tenants. These have succeeded in reducing rent arrears, evictions and tenancy turnover.

• Tenants at risk of losing their tenancies have been supported through projects building confidence and life skills and promoting access to employment.

• Associations have given support to projects aimed at reducing youth disorder and have been involved in family mediation work.

• The development of community facilities and the provision of extra support to vulnerable people have been used to demonstrate to communities unsure about controversial developments that associations are committed to making new developments work effectively.

• All this activity has been used by housing associations to demonstrate to other agencies the added value that they bring to the management and development of housing and to establish them as a partner of choice for future work.

3.3. The Social Case and Answering the Challenge from Other Stakeholders 3.3.1. The social case for housing associations becoming more involved in community regeneration activity is two fold. Firstly, the tenants and communities that they serve are in need of more support and better services to achieve a better quality of life. Secondly, that they are in an ideal position to take action on these issues. 3.3.2. It is the nature of that position that enables associations to make a clear offer to other regeneration stakeholders to be central to the delivery of their objectives and to answer the challenge they pose. 3.3.3. It has been clearly established that social housing tenants are more disadvantaged than those living in other tenures. The Scottish Household survey3 provides a snapshot across a number of criteria that highlight the extent to which housing association tenants are amongst some of the most disadvantaged people in

3 The Scottish Household Survey 2005/06, Scottish Government Social Research 2007.

17

Scotland. When looking at the following statistics it should be remembered that the total proportion of Scottish households who rent their home from a housing association is 8%. 3.2.6 Income and Financial Inclusion

• Some 11% of households with an income below £6K per annum; 14% of households with an income between £6k - £10K; and 13% of households with an income of between 10k - 15K rent from a housing association.

• Those who rent from a housing association make up 20% of households in the most deprived quintile of neighbourhoods.

• Some 24%of HA tenants do not have a bank account compared with only 6% of those buying their home with a loan or mortgage.

• Whilst 50% of HA tenants do not have a bank account compared with only 2% of those buying their home with a loan or mortgage4.

3.2.7 Homelessness • Of the adults who have experienced homelessness, 19% rent from a housing association.

3.2.8 Health

• In 56% of housing association households at least one person has a long term limiting illness. The comparative figure for those buying their home with a mortgage or loan is 19%, for those who own their home outright 38%.

• In 22% of housing association households at least one person requires regular help or care. The comparative figure for those buying their home with a mortgage or loan is 5%, for those who own their home outright 12%.

3.2.9 Anti Social Behaviour

• Some 17% of housing association tenants experience problems with vandalism/ graffiti or damage to property. The same is true of 12% of those buying their home with a loan or mortgage.

• Whilst 10% of housing association tenants experience problems with drug dealing/ drug abuse locally. The same is true of 4% of those buying their home with a loan or mortgage.

3.2.10 Environment/ Recycling

• Half of all housing association tenants are involved in some form of recycling activity. Comparative figures for other tenures are 87% of those owning their own home outright and 84% of those buying their home with a loan/ mortgage.

3.2.11. The ability of housing associations to take action on this range of issues is based on a number of their ‘assets’; their financial, organisational, human resource and relationship strengths. 3.2.12. Housing associations have stable and predicable incomes based on tenants’ rents, considerable physical assets against which they can borrow and, in many cases, have accumulated significant reserves. They are also often channels for spending of considerable public money in the communities that they serve, for example in the form of spending on new build and refurbishment. 3.2.13. These financial strengths give housing associations real organisational stability, meaning that they are present in their communities for the long term. Their

4 The last three statistics here from Financial Inclusion, A Topic Report from the Scottish Household Survey, Scottish Government Social Research, 2007

18

other key organisational asset lies in their governance under a robust regulatory framework that ensures they are well governed operating to clear rules. 3.2.14. Housing associations employ a wide range of staff, from housing support officers working to meet the varied needs of vulnerable tenants, to development managers overseeing major new build or refurbishment projects, to finance managers responsible for millions of pounds of assets. This spread and depth of the expertise and knowledge within housing associations is a major human resource asset. 3.2.15. The statistics above make clear that housing associations have a relationship with the same people that other organisations working in community regeneration wish to engage. The nature of that relationship is a key asset.

• Associations are generally trusted by their tenants. • Housing associations hold a range of information on tenants. Some of this is very basic, for example personal contact information, other information may be more detailed and personal, for example relating to rent accounts, disability or identified vulnerabilities.

• Housing staff have many opportunities for face to face contact with their tenants, e.g. at tenancy sign up, at annual/ settling in visits, when dealing with repairs or refurbishment, or when dealing with specific housing management problems. Such face to face engagement will often involve being in tenants’ homes in a way replicated by few other public agencies.

3.2.16. These assets enable housing associations to play a number of specific roles in community regeneration:

• Community anchor. Housing associations can play the role of community anchor, being the base on which a wider range of community regeneration activity is built, in physical, financial and organisational terms. Physically, the use of their skills as developers and managers of assets can create and sustain facilities for broader community use. Financially, their ability to invest their own resources in community regeneration and attract other funding for that purpose enables them to provide a financial base for community regeneration activity. Organisationally, they can support other community organisations with advice and practical assistance, or extend their involvement so far as to incubate such organisations or establish them as subsidiaries.

• Trusted intermediary. Housing associations’ status as trusted intermediaries with their tenants allows them to make two specific contributions to community regeneration. Firstly, they can directly promote services to their tenants and communities, through tenant newsletters, targeted mail shots, or face to face contact. Secondly, they can act to identify tenants in need of specific support and refer them to such support. For example, housing associations, through rent account information, may know before any other public agency that a tenant is struggling financially and therefore be their first line of defence against problematic debt by linking them to advice services

• Creative contractor. Housing associations can use their economic power as employers, customers and contractors to achieve wider community benefit. They can grant maintenance contracts to social enterprises employing vulnerable people; directly offer job placements to local people in need of such opportunities; negotiate with building contractors to make a contribution to local environmental improvements; and agree with banking partners that the latter will fund financial inclusion initiatives, such as money advice projects.

19

4. Policy Context 4.1.1. This chapter gives an overview of the policy and practice context in which the future engagement of housing associations in contributing to community regeneration, social enterprise development, promoting community empowerment and community planning is developing. 4.1.2. The first section aims to describe the key policy drivers flowing from the new Scottish Government’s overall strategy. It includes a consideration of the evolution of housing policy, the Scottish Government’s approach to community regeneration and tackling disadvantage and the development of wider role, social enterprise and community planning. 4.1.3. The second section gives a brief overview of some of the key policy trends in England, based on a clear understanding that a number of the issues faced by the social housing sector in England are similar to those in Scotland. 4.1.4. The election of an SNP minority Scottish Government in May 2007 after 8 years of rule by a Labour/ Liberal Democrat coalition promised significant changes in priority and direction. The extent of those changes is a matter for debate. Significant continuities are evident, alongside subtle shifts in tone, approach and mechanisms for policy delivery.

4.2. The Government Economic Strategy 4.2.1 The key document in understanding the Government’s public policy thinking is The Government Economic Strategy, published in November 20075. In this the First Minister states that:

‘Sustainable economic growth is the one central Purpose to which all else in government is directed and contributes. Our Strategic Objectives – to make Scotland wealthier and fairer; smarter; healthier; safer and stronger; and greener – are all predicated on our efforts to bring more economic success to our country.’

4.2.2. The strategic objectives for the Government are described in more detail later in the document, to make Scotland:

• ‘Wealthier and Fairer – Enable businesses and people to increase their wealth and more people to share fairly in that wealth.

• Smarter – Expand opportunities for Scots to succeed from nurture through to life- long learning ensuring higher and more widely shared achievements.

• Healthier – Help people to sustain and improve their health, especially in disadvantaged communities, ensuring better, local and faster access to health care.

• Safer and Stronger – Help local communities to flourish, becoming stronger, safer places to live, offering improved opportunities and a better quality of life.

• Greener – Improve Scotland’s natural and built environment and the sustainable use and enjoyment of it.’

5 The Government Economic Strategy, The Scottish Government, 2007.

20

4.2.3. The Strategy sets out five strategic priorities to deliver its aim of sustainable growth:

• Learning, skills and well being. • Supportive business environment. • Infrastructure development and place. • Effective Government. • Equity.

4.2.4. A number of the more detailed issues and policies discussed under the document’s strategic priorities have potential implications for housing associations in their contribution to community regeneration. 4.2.5. Under the learning, skills and well being priority there is a commitment to focus more sharply on tackling health inequalities and disadvantaged areas. This is likely to give a higher priority to the people and communities served by housing associations. 4.2.6. Amongst the actions under the infrastructure objective the Scottish Government intends to focus on creating a housing system that is more responsive to need and which will give better access to more affordable, well designed and energy efficient housing – helping Scotland to attract and retained skilled people. 4.2.7. The more effective government strategic priority commits the Scottish Government to more effective public sector procurement and better use of the public sector’s purchasing power. 4.2.8. The Strategy sets out targets under three issues related to equity; solidarity (social equity), cohesion (equity between areas) and sustainability (equity between generations). 4.2.9. The solidarity target is to ‘Increase the overall income and the proportion of income earned by the three lowest income deciles as a group by 2017.’ 4.2.10. Of particular relevance to this report are the proposals to:

• focus [its] policy across our Strategic Objectives on reducing inequality in Scotland …;

• support social enterprise, as part of investment in an enterprising third sector, ensuring the provision of start-up assistance and encouraging efforts to provide supported employment as an early step for those furthest from the labour market;

• ensure that support is provided to improve the life chances of those most at risk;

• ensure that young people who need more choices and more chances have access to these;

4.2.11. The cohesion target is to ‘Narrow the gap between Scotland’s best and worst performing regions by 2017.’ 4.2.12. The relevant undertakings here are to:

• implement single outcome agreements to target the transformation of areas of lowest economic activity, with a focus on Scotland’s urban regeneration priorities;

• ensure a more strategic approach to the growth of Scotland’s, cities, towns and rural areas across transport, planning, housing and economic development;

• build on the fuller utilisation of electronic connectivity;

21

• ensure the most remote areas of Scotland can contribute to, and benefit from, economic growth;

• implement the Scotland Rural Development Programme (currently under consideration by the European Commission) to develop the rural business base, communities and environment.

4.3. Tackling Poverty, Inequality and Deprivation 4.3.1. January 2008 saw the release of ‘Taking Forward the Government Economic Strategy: A Discussion Paper on Tackling Poverty, Inequality and Deprivation in Scotland’6. 4.3.2. The paper not only sets out the moral case for tackling persistent poverty, but also highlights that poverty is an obstacle to the Government achieving its aim of sustainable growth, by wasting human potential and through the knock on costs of dealing with its consequences. 4.3.3. The paper seeks to create a framework for improving the co-ordination of efforts to tackle poverty, inequality and deprivation. The central role of local authorities as partners in this work is recognised and this is underpinned by the new concordat between central and local government. It also states that there is now a clear idea of what works in terms of preventing poverty and lifting people out of poverty. 4.3.4. The paper refers to the Government Economic Strategy’s solidarity, cohesion and sustainability targets. As well as pursuing these, the Scottish Government commits to the UK Government’s target of ending child poverty by 2020 and to tackling the issue of economic inactivity endemic in particular areas of the country. 4.3.5. There is a clear recognition in the paper that tackling poverty is about more than income and involves creating better access to a range of other non material and material resources, including health, education and housing. 4.3.6. A number of key principles to guide policy tackling poverty are described:

• tackling causes as well symptoms; • building individuals’ internal capacity and resilience alongside tackling structural barriers;

• focusing on prevention and early intervention to break the cycle of disadvantage

• sustainable employment for those who can work, support for those who can’t; • a conviction that everyone should be enabled to fulfil their potential; • using gendered analyses and gendered approaches where required; • targeted support at the most disadvantaged, within universal guaranteed minimum provision;

• partnership working and seamless service provision, moving people through support systems appropriately;

• sustained, holistic client centred support; • user involvement, consultation, community engagement and empowerment; • a balance between tackling inequality and helping the very poorest; • more effective public engagement around tackling poverty.

6 Taking Forward the Government Economic Strategy: A Discussion Paper on Tackling Poverty, Inequality and Deprivation in Scotland, Scottish Government 2008

22

4.3.7. The paper sets out three key areas for action. In the first, prevention of poverty and tackling the root causes, the Scottish Government promises action on educational disadvantage; tackling poor health; providing more choices for young people; tackling worklessness; focusing on children’s early years; and regenerating disadvantaged communities. It also proposes action to tackle some of the class based attitudes and perceptions of the worth of different types of work that underlie poverty. 4.3.8. The second area for action, helping to lift people out of poverty, focuses on action to improve employability, mental health and well being; the provision of advice and information; improving benefit take up; and addressing key transition points such as substance abuse, homelessness and reoffending. 4.3.9. The third area, alleviating the impact of poverty on people’s lives focuses on action to increase the entitlement to, and take up of, school meals, the abolition of prescription charges, free personal care for the elderly, free bus travel, fuel poverty, developing the idea of a living wage and the abolition of the Council Tax. 4.3.10. Single Outcome Agreements are seen as central to the process of tackling poverty. The Scottish Government sees its role as: “…setting the direction of travel, joining up the range of national policies and programmes that must be brought to bear and working with partners in local government, the NHS and beyond to help facilitate the delivery of agreed outcomes.” 4.3.11. The Government states that: ‘…the Third Sector has a crucial role to play and should be regarded as a full partner in the process. They provide crucial services for some of the most vulnerable in society and are usually a trusted sources of advice and support for the hardest to reach, often those who are reluctant to seek help from public services. We foresee a strong role for the Third Sector in delivering our ambitions in this area.’

4.4. Fairer Scotland Fund

4.4.1. The Fairer Scotland Fund will be the key source of central financial support for delivering activity aimed at the Government’s objectives to tackle area based and individual poverty and to improve employability. The Government expects the new fund to achieve reduced administration costs and greater flexibility in use and enhanced local autonomy7. 4.4.2. Some £145m has been allocated each year from 2008/09 to 2010/11 to the Fairer Scotland Fund, ring-fenced for two years. The Fairer Scotland Fund brings together seven funds administered by the previous Executive and its agencies: the Community Regeneration Fund, Community Voices Fund, Working for Families, Work Force Plus, More Choices More Chances, Financial Inclusion Fund and Changing Children’s Services. It will be allocated by Community Planning Partnerships. 4.4.3. The fund is intended to act as a catalyst for more effective joint working, achieve improved outcomes and lever mainstream resources. Its use will be guided by the key principles of:

7 Information in this section from Fairer Scotland Fund; Improving Lives, Regenerating Communities: Purposes and Principles, Presentation by Alisdair McIntosh, Scottish Government to Improvement Service Seminar, January 2008

23

• Tackling the root causes of concentrated and persistent poverty. • Making early interventions for and with vulnerable individuals, families and disadvantaged communities.

• Promoting and improving joint working between local partners. • Focusing action on improving employability. • Empowering communities and individuals to influence and inform decisions made by partners in Community Planning Partnerships.

4.4.4. Local authorities are expected to take an outcome based approach to the use of the fund, delivering clear improvements in the opportunities and quality of life for the most disadvantaged areas and people. In pursuit of those outcomes, they will have the freedom to focus on the most pressing issues in their area. The Scottish Government will not be prescriptive about the approach taken. 4.4.5. The allocation of the Fairer Scotland Fund will seek to balance the need to respond to both area based and individual poverty and will be based in part on the 2006 Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation. 4.4.6. The Fairer Scotland Fund will not have a dedicated monitoring regime, but will instead be monitored through the national performance framework. The Government is aiming to create a set of local indicators which Community Planning Partnerships can use and adapt to reflect the local context and priorities.

4.5 Firm Foundations 4.5.1. Firm Foundations was published in October 2007 as a consultation document seeking views on the future direction of housing policy in Scotland8. The Deputy First Minister characterises the housing policy challenge for the Government as meeting the needs of those people who are unable to satisfy their aspiration to find a decent home that they can afford in a place where they want to live. People are seen as struggling to meet their aspirations in terms of home ownership; their specific housing needs; locations from which they can easily access work, education and leisure opportunities; or for settled accommodation. 4.5.2. The Scottish Government does not believe that people can meet their aspirations at the current annual rate of house production of 25,000. It therefore proposes to increase annual house completions to 35,000 per annum, with all new houses to be more energy efficient in line with the Government’s sustainability agenda. 4.5.3. Firm Foundations also highlights the past mistakes of creating large single tenure estates that Fail to foster a sense of community and are poorly connected to jobs and services. They have therefore retained the policy of tenure diversification. 4.5.4. A number of continuities in approach with the previous administration are acknowledged. In particular there are no proposals to change homelessness legislation and previous progress in achieving the Scottish Housing Quality Standard (SHQS) and addressing fuel poverty is recognised.

8 Firm Foundations, The Future of Housing in Scotland, Scottish Government 2007.

24

4.5.6. Firm Foundations makes a clear statement that it views social housing as having a positive future and that it will not only be the long term tenure for some, but also a critical support at various points in their lives for others. However, it highlights a number of structural challenges for the sector:

• Social housing is increasingly seen, even by social rented tenants, as a sub optimal housing choice.

• Disadvantaged and vulnerable people are increasingly concentrated in the sector, with the proportion of pensioners, single parents and single people on the rise and rates of employment and income increasingly divergent from those in other tenures.

• More than 60% of social rented houses are in the most disadvantaged three deciles of neighbourhoods in Scotland.

• The consequence of these trends is increased stigmatisation. 4.5.7. Alongside these trends, Firm Foundations highlights some areas of concern about the performance of the social rented sector. One third of those inspected since 2001 were judged to be providing fair to poor housing management services. Poor housing management is seen as having the potential to blight neighbourhoods. 4.5.8. The Scottish Government believes that management and development costs within the sector are rising to an unsustainable extent. The former are viewed as particularly critical, with rising public subsidy being required for housing development at the same time as there is a need for rapid expansion in the development of more social rented housing, all in the context of finite budgets. This is inconsistent with the Scottish Government’s agenda to promote the efficient use of public resources. They also suggest that the sector is lagging behind the efficiency of social housing development in England. 4.5.9. To reverse the increase in development costs, Firm Foundations proposes to move towards appointing one lead developer in each housing market area. Developers will be chosen on a competitive basis to deliver larger scale, longer term programmes that will deliver greater efficiencies. This approach would also allow a more strategic view to be taken of development. Housing associations are expected to take on this lead developer role in the first instance, with a presumption that they will develop on behalf of other housing associations and become highly specialised, experienced and skilled in the development process. 4.5.10. A number of other changes proposed in Firm Foundations are of particular interest:

• The freeing of local authorities to develop new social rented housing themselves, using their prudential borrowing regime, or supported by government resources accessed under competitive tender.

• The potential for housing associations to attract subsidy to provide housing for mid market rent.

• More freedom for housing associations to sell stock or convert it to mid market rent to achieve more mixed communities.

• Stock transfer will continue to be an option for local authorities, where supported by tenants and a sound business plan.

• Local authorities will also have the option to create Arms Length Management Organisations where stock transfer is not and option and it would assist the achievement of SHQS targets.

25

4.5.11. Firm Foundations also has a focus on the creation of better neighbourhoods. Housing associations have often played the key role in ensuring high environmental quality in the development of new neighbourhoods. However, the paper acknowledges that the quality of environmental development can easily get squeezed in tight financial circumstances. Furthermore the ongoing maintenance of open spaces in new and existing developments can be a challenge and a source of real concern for tenants. The Scottish Government wishes to see closer working between stakeholders on such issues and to pilot and test new approaches to taking action. 4.5.12. Firm Foundations acknowledges that it does not deal with the people-based regeneration activity which complements physical development (and therefore does not deal with wider role). It states that it regards such work as the rightful focus of Community Planning Partnerships and Single Outcome Agreements, but acknowledges the need to link the physical developments to its five strategic objectives. 4.5.13. The final area of change proposed within Firm Foundations of relevance to this report is the move to abolish Communities Scotland and set up an independent housing regulator. The new regulatory environment will focus on placing outcomes for tenants, including neighbourhood management, at the heart of regulation. A lighter regulatory touch will be introduced, with in-depth inspection only triggered when there is specific cause for concern. Communities Scotland’s other functions will pass to the Scottish Government.

4.6 Scottish Government Support for Wider Role 4.6.1 Scottish housing associations have been involved since their creation in playing a wider role in the communities that they serve than simply the provision of housing. Scottish Homes, however, introduced specific financial support of this role through their Wider Role Policy in 2000. 4.6.2. The policy was revised by Communities Scotland in their 2003 Wider Role statement9, the success of which was evaluated in 200610 (though the Review was only published in 2008). The Scottish Government has recently announced that Wider Role funding will continue for three years and an interim Wider Role Policy statement set out priorities for 2008/0911, which will be further refined over the next year. 4.6.3. Communities Scotland’s Wider Role Policy Statement of 2003 gave a clear definition of wider role:

‘Activity that RSLs are involved in that go beyond the provision, improvement and management of housing, with the aim of improving the economic, social and environmental circumstances within which RSLs operate.’

4.6.4. Although housing associations were expected to consider their potential wider role in communities, there was no compulsion on them to develop wider role activity. Communities Scotland acknowledged that even without such engagement they would still contribute to community regeneration through their housing function.

9 Regenerating Communities, the Role of Social Landlords, Communities Scotland 2003. 10 Evaluation of the Wider Role Funding Programme, Communities Scotland, Precis 115, Research Report 97, Communities Scotland 2008 11 Letter to Housing Associations from Alisdair McIntosh, Scottish Government, 8th February 2008.

26

4.6.5. Despite the term ‘Wider Role’, Communities Scotland was clear that such activity was not to be an add-on to the activities of housing associations. Housing associations considering undertaking such work were to do so in the context of their thinking about their overall business development. Furthermore, the statement was clear that wider role was not solely about the use of wider role funding. 4.6.6. The statement gave a clear justification for housing associations to become involved in wider role activity, based on their financial and physical assets; access to secure resource streams; their strong links to communities of place and interest; their professional staff; their place within a regulated system; and their business track record. 4.6.7. Clear priorities were set for the use of the wider role funding in the statement - to tackle poverty, build strong and safe communities and help people back to work. Further clarity was provided by the 2004 Closing the Gap Statement, whose priorities were to shape the use of wider role and were to:

• Increase the chances of sustained employment for vulnerable and disadvantaged groups.

• Improve the confidence and skills of the most disadvantaged children and young people.

• Reduce the vulnerability of low income families to financial exclusion and multiple debts.

• Regenerate the most disadvantaged neighbourhoods. • Increase the rate of improvement of the health status of people within the most disadvantaged neighbourhoods.

• Improve access to high quality services for the most disadvantaged groups and neighbourhoods12.

4.6.8. Projects supported through the Wider Role Fund were expected to deliver on these priorities, whilst also fitting with more local strategies. Sustainability was also highlighted as a key issue for applicants. The fund was not intended to provide long-term support for projects and any support beyond three years was to be tapered. 4.6.9. Housing associations were able to apply for wider role funding to deliver projects themselves, to deliver through a subsidiary, to effectively ‘contract’ with, or otherwise to provide support to, a voluntary organisation. Where there was engagement with the voluntary sector, Communities Scotland were keen to ensure that such engagement involved a genuine change to the practices of the applicant association. 4.6.10. Responsibility for the management of Wider Role resources was initially located within the Regeneration Division of Communities Scotland, although it eventually passed to the Social Economy Division. Day to day responsibility for the programme was located with the Social Justice teams within the Area Office Network, as part of a wider range of tasks. 4.6.11. The programme set in place as a result of the 2003 statement was to run until March 2008. The evaluation13 of the Wider Role programme explored the value delivered by the programme, the effectiveness of its operation and made recommendations for its future. 12 Closing the Opportunity Gap, Scottish Executive 2004. 13 Evaluation of the Wider Role Funding Programme, Communities Scotland, Precis 115, Research Report 97, Communities Scotland 2008

27

4.6.12. The evaluation was mainly positive, in particular concluding that: • The Wider Role programme had supported a steady growth in the wider involvement of housing associations in community regeneration.

• It had generally been spent in areas of real need and had supported projects that had made a real difference to the communities by developing new services and improvements to quality of life.

• It had acted as a magnet for a considerable amount of funding from other sources.

• There was some fit between wider role activities and other local community regeneration work.

• The use of wider role funding had been a benefit to the wider voluntary sector and social economy.

• Housing Associations accessing the wider role fund had benefited by raising their profile within their communities, improving their ability to contribute to wider community regeneration, developing stronger partnerships with other agencies and better relationships with their tenants.

4.6.13. The evaluation made a number of recommendations for the improvement of the operation of the programme:

• There was a need for an updated, more sharply focused, statement of national policy on wider role.

• Wider role and local regeneration priorities needed to be more closely aligned and a closer working relationship was required between housing associations and other regeneration partners.

• A national framework should be put in place for the monitoring and evaluation of the outcomes and outputs achieved by wider role projects.

• A standard and more transparent application process was required to deal with some of the variations in the operation of wider role between different offices, which was a source of difficulty for some associations.

• Increased emphasis on the sustainability of projects was required during appraisal.

• Effort should be made to build on the collective experience of the sector in the delivery of wider role, with more opportunities for peer support, collaboration, skills transfer and sharing information and best practice sharing.

4.6.14. The key recommendation of the evaluation was for the continuation of a designated fund to support housing associations wider role activity, with the improvements outlined above taken on board. 4.6.15. The allocation of £12m per annum for three years within the Scottish Government’s Budget removed the considerable uncertainty that had existed within the sector about the future of the Wider Role Fund. This had largely been the result of the delay in publishing the evaluation and the abolition of Communities Scotland. 4.6.16. In February 2008 the Scottish Government sent a letter to all Scottish housing associations setting out a statement on the future of wider role. 4.6.17. With the abolition of Communities Scotland, the management of the Wider Role programme has now been taken up by the Housing and Regeneration Division of the Scottish Government. Day to day contact with housing associations will be through locally based officers whose sole responsibilities are to run the programme. 4.6.18. The Government is clear that it is only currently able to set out an interim priority statement relating to the Wider Role Fund. Priorities will be further refined in

28

the context of broader developments in relation to the Firm Foundations consultation, the Fairer Scotland Fund, the development of Single Outcome Agreements with local authorities and Community Planning Partnerships and the recent discussion paper on the tackling of poverty and disadvantage. A final policy statement is expected later in 2008 and until then funding will not be committed beyond March 2009. 4.6.19. The letter states:

‘The principles underpinning investment of the Wider Role fund should complement those confirmed for the Fairer Scotland Fund:

• Increased focus on investment to address the causes of poverty, community decline and worklessness – not only the symptoms;

• Strong emphasis on making early interventions for and with vulnerable individuals, families and disadvantaged communities;

• Working to improve employability as a key means of tackling poverty; • Empowering communities and individuals to influence and inform RSL activities;

• Commitment to work with local authorities and community planning partnerships to aim for the achievement of common outcomes …’

‘Proposals should be focused on the following three themes:

• Improving employability and making early interventions to tackle poverty for and with vulnerable people/ disadvantaged communities;

• Developing joint work on community regeneration with local authorities and community planning partnerships;

• Improving quality of place in your neighbourhoods.’ 4.6.20. The letter also states that the Scottish Government:

• Wishes to see closer fit between wider role projects and local regeneration projects.

• Wishes to support more partnership working between Housing associations on Wider Role projects to ensure better sustainment of projects and handling of risk.

• Will focus on support for frontline services rather than wider role infrastructure work.

4.7. Social Enterprise and the Social Economy 4.7.1. There has been considerable debate about the correct definition of the terms ‘social economy’ and social enterprise. A “wide” definition of the social economy embraces all voluntary and non profit distributing organisations, whilst a “narrow” definition limits it to social enterprises and voluntary organisations with an “economic dimension”14. Whichever definition is used, it is clear that the sector is of a significant size and undertakes a wide range of activities. It has to cope with a number of constraints, some of which are the inevitable consequences of its nature and its goals, whilst others stem from complexities of procurement, funding and regulatory regimes. 4.7.2. Housing associations are already engaged with the social economy to a considerable extent. Research commissioned by Communities Scotland into the

14 The Social Economy: a literature review, Communities Scotland Precis 10 and Research report 4, Communities Scotland, 2002.

29

relationship between housing associations and the social economy15 found that 25% of housing associations outsourced services to social enterprises, with 18% of housing associations having their own subsidiary social enterprises delivering a range of services. Larger housing associations were more likely to trade with social enterprises, but many would only do so with organisations that were financially self-sustaining rather than grant dependent. 4.7.3. In 2003 the Scottish Executive published the social economy review16. It estimated that the social economy had an income of £2.2 billion (4% GDP), employed 100,000 people and involved 700,000 volunteers in 44,000 voluntary organisations, including 22,000 charities. It analysed support for the social economy sector and set out a strategic framework for strengthening social economy organisations and highlighting the barriers to achieving this. 4.7.4. This review followed an earlier Communities Scotland17 report exploring the support needs of the social enterprise sector, which identified nine key issues:

• Funding: Support in identifying funding, more user friendly application processes, more liberal attitude to surpluses and access to core funding.

• Facilitating networking: sharing good practice, mentoring, partnerships. • Sourcing volunteers • Recruiting, retaining and managing staff. • Affordable, flexible and relevant training • Affordable advice on statutory responsibilities. • Access to simple and affordable business services • Securing affordable premises • Coherent and targeted support infrastructure.

4.7.5. In response to the review, the Scottish Executive launched the Futurebuilders Scotland programme18. This focused support on three priority areas for the Executive: Closing the Opportunity Gap, Community Regeneration and the support and development of young people. Some £18m was to be invested in the social economy in the period 2004-05 to 2005-06:

• £12m was earmarked for the Investment Fund and was designed to encourage large and medium sized social economy organisations to engage in capital investment, operate in a more business-like way and to develop financial sustainability;

• A £4m Seedcorn Fund was designed to help emerging organisations develop new ideas and enlarge existing schemes that could contribute to their growth and stability;

• A £1m Training Fund supported mainstream learning opportunities for people working in the social economy to develop business skills;

• A £1m Support Fund helped organisations gain new skills and enter new markets.

4.7.6. Futurebuilders also established Local Social Economy Partnerships (LSEPs) which were intended to cover all local authority areas in Scotland, although only 30 have been established to date. Each LSEP included Communities Scotland, Scottish

15 Registered social landlords and the social economy, Communities Scotland Precis 97 and Research report 71, Communities Scotland, 2007. 16 A Review of the Scottish Executive’s Policies to Promote the Social Economy, The Scottish Executive, 2003. 17 The Support Needs of Social Economy Organisations, Communities Scotland Precis 15 and Research report 10, Communities Scotland, 2002. 18 Futurebuilders Scotland, Investing in the Social Economy, Scottish Executive, 2004.

30

Enterprise or Highlands and Islands Enterprise, the local authority and the local council for voluntary services as the core partners. The overall goal of these partnerships is to support the growth of the social economy by: • improving co-ordination across partners; • facilitating local networking; • strengthening the range of locally available support; and • unlocking market opportunities for new and existing social economy organisations. 4.7.7. A further strategy for the social enterprise segment of the social economy was published by the Scottish Executive in March 200719. It adopted the Department of Trade & Industry definition of social enterprise20: “Businesses with primarily social objectives whose surpluses are principally reinvested for that purpose in the business or in the community, rather than being driven by the need to maximise profit for shareholders or owners”. On the basis of this definition, they estimated that there are around 3,000 social enterprises in Scotland with an estimated turnover of £1 billion a year. 4.7.8. The strategy highlighted the important roles social enterprises make in contributing to economic growth; delivering services focussed on the needs of people; and regenerating and empowering people in deprived communities and supporting employment. Investment of £1.5 million was allocated to an action plan to promote four strategic objectives: • raising the profile and demonstrating the value of social enterprise; • opening up markets to social enterprise; • increasing the range of finance available to social enterprises; and • developing the trading capacity of social enterprises through better business support.

4.7.9. The new Scottish Government’s emerging policy, for what they are calling “the enterprising third sector”, has similarities with that of the previous administration, but also marks distinctive shift in emphasis. They share the previous Executive’s desire to reduce grant dependency in the sector, but place more emphasis on the need to harness its entrepreneurialism to contribute to economic growth. Similarly, their continued recognition of the sector’s ability to reach places and people that others cannot is now complemented by a sharper focus on its employability and early intervention contributions, which they believe will enable more people in society to contribute to economic growth. This is also reflected in the location of the Third Sector Division of the Scottish Government under the Director General for Economy and Public Sector Reform. 4.7.8. In the 2008 Scottish Budget21 the Scottish Government announced the introduction of a third sector support programme worth £30m over three years. On 5th March they announced how this would be allocated:

• The network of Councils for Voluntary Service will receive £11.85m for Third Sector Development.

• Volunteer Centres will receive £11.5m to work with people seeking volunteering opportunities.

• A further £4m to help the third sector become more enterprising and deliver more public services has been allocated to:

o Local Social Economy Partnerships (£750k);

19 Better Business: A strategy and action plan for social enterprise in Scotland, The Scottish Executive, 2007. 20 Social Enterprise: A strategy for success, Department of Trade & Industry, 2002. 21 Scottish Budget- Spending Review 2007, The Scottish Government, 2007.

31

o Social Enterprise Networks (£294k); o the Social Enterprise Academy (£940k);

• for social entrepreneur support through: o First Port (£521k); o the Council of Ethnic Minority Voluntary Organisations (£258k), o action research on Older People for Older People led by the University of the Highlands and Islands (£100k);

o the Scottish Social Enterprise Coalition (£225k); o Evaluation Support Scotland (£351k); o Development Trusts Association (£240k); o International Network of Street Papers (£30k); o and for social enterprise support in the Highlands and Islands (£250k).

4.7.9. The Scottish Government also announced in the budget that £63.6m would be allocated over three years to support a development programme for an innovative third sector. In addition, the Budget referred to a proposal to developing strategic partnerships with key national and regional intermediaries to ensure effective infrastructure for the third sector. It is anticipated that a new strategy for the Third Sector will be launched in Spring 2008. 4.7.10. As housing associations have been allocated dedicated funding through the Wider Role programme, they are not likely to benefit from the Investment Fund or other direct funds, although their social enterprise subsidiaries may be able to do so. Housing associations might be expected, however, to benefit from the wider developmental work the Scottish Government are pursuing, for example on procurement and research. 4.7.11. Although central government funding will continue for the next three years, the social enterprise sector will be affected by the increased devolution of power to local authorities and community planning partnerships. The Scottish Government’s Concordat with the Convention for Scottish Local Authorities includes an Outcome to “Increase the social economy turnover”22. Furthermore, LSEPs are likely to move under the umbrella of Community Planning Partnerships. 4.7.12. The trend in policy from the Scottish Government is therefore to marginally increase the central government support for the social economy started by its predecessor. When its full proposals for the sector are published, they are likely to focus more sharply on promoting social enterprises’ independence from grant and their contribution to helping the workless gain employment. Wider efforts to support the sector, open markets and undertake research should benefit all enterprising third sector organisations.

22 Concordat Between the Scottish Government and Local Government, The Scottish Government / COSLA, 2007

32

4.8. Community Engagement and Community Empowerment

4.8.1. Community engagement has been defined as: ‘Developing and sustaining a working relationship between one or more public body and one or more community

group, to help them both to understand and act on the needs or issues that the community experiences.’23 This definition encompasses the long-held practices of, and more recent statutory requirement placed on, housing associations to consult their tenants.

4.8.2. The definition of community empowerment is not straightforward. The Scottish Government states that “Our vision of community empowerment…include(s) delegated power, citizen control and partnership. Delegated power, involves citizens holding a clear majority of seats on committees and having delegated powers to make decisions. Citizen control involves the public handling the entire job of planning, policy making and managing a programme”. 24

4.8.3. The Scottish Executive established the £3m Community Empowerment Fund in the period 2002/03-2004/05, with the aim strengthening community participation in Social Inclusion Partnerships (SIPs). In particular it sought to ensure that community representatives could play a full and equal part in partnerships.

4.8.4. Further policy changes saw Community Planning become the focus of regeneration activity. The Community Empowerment Fund was therefore succeeded by the Community Voices Programme which aimed to support Community Planning Partnerships to deliver community engagement activity in the most disadvantaged areas in Scotland. A little over £3m p.a. was allocated to them from 2005/06-2007/08 for this purpose. The programme focussed on helping Community Planning Partnerships enter into ongoing dialogue with communities in the context of the development of Regeneration Outcome Agreements (ROAs).

4.8.5. To support this activity Communities Scotland published the National Standards for Community Engagement in 2005. Developed with the involvement of over 500 people from communities and agencies throughout Scotland, this aimed at the creation of a practical tool to help improve the experience of all participants involved in community engagement and achieve the highest quality of process and results. The standards comprise measurable performance statements and set out key principles, behaviours and practical measures that underpin effective engagement.

4.8.6. Progress in improving community engagement in these settings was reviewed in 2006. Audit Scotland25 concluded that whilst progress had been made, community engagement needed to be more sustained and systematic. Its report suggested that Community Planning Partnerships needed to be able to better demonstrate the impact and the benefits of their community engagement activities. It identified the National Standards as an opportunity for Community Planning Partnerships to achieve this.

4.8.7. The Scottish Government has continued to seek to support community engagement. As part of the Scottish Government’s aim of devolving more power to the local level, the funding for the Community Voices Programme will continue, but will be rolled up with other programmes in the Fairer Scotland Fund.

23 National Standards for Community Engagement, Communities Scotland, 2005 24 Making Community Empowerment a Reality- Feedback from discussion sessions. The Scottish Government, 2008. 25 Community Planning: An initial review, Audit Scotland, 2006

33

4.8.8. The Scottish Government has also given a commitment to help individuals and communities, particularly those living in areas of deprivation, to have more control over their own lives and more choice in how their needs are met.

4.8.9. A series of consultation events on community empowerment were held at the end of 2007, leading to a summary paper in January 2008.26 The events found a strong consensus that community empowerment was part of the broad agenda of community engagement between communities and agencies. Three models of community empowerment were put forward in the summary paper:

• Budgets and resources: assets like land and buildings would be devolved to the control of local community led organisations. Community Anchor Organisations are viewed as the catalyst and driver for change under this model.

• Community scrutiny of services: public sector service delivery agencies (and perhaps parts of the voluntary sector) would make a binding commitment that communities would assess the quality of the delivery of agreed services within an area.

• Devolved decision making to neighbourhood level with the community in the majority on decision making structures. This could build on existing models of governance at community level and could involve community bodies like community councils, community forums or Registered Tenant Organisations.

4.8.10. The Scottish Government is expected to make a policy announcement on Community Empowerment in Spring 2008. The transfer of assets into community control could be seen as an element in supporting their aim of growing social enterprise, based on experience in the Highlands and Islands which suggests that community ownership has released community entrepreneurship27.

4.8.11. There is interest from the SFHA and others in the notion of ‘Community Anchor Organisations’ and whether housing associations could take on such a role. The Scottish Government’s discussion paper on community empowerment draws heavily on English definitions, “…independent community led organisations with multi-purpose functions, which provide a focal point for local communities and community organisations, and for community services. They often own and manage community assets, and support small community organisations to reach out across the community.”28 The Government’s discussion paper also goes on to suggest that community based housing associations already exemplify community anchor organisations. 4.8.12. Currently, the Government’s use of the term ‘Community Anchor Organisations’, is simply an attempt to describe the way the activities of some organisations. The term is not an official designation or award with firmly established criteria. 4.8.13. The current administration therefore seems likely to continue support community empowerment and community engagement, particularly in Community Planning Partnerships with a combination of financial support, moral encouragement and good practice standards. More detail on how it proposes to do this is expected to be set out in the near future.

26 Making Community Empowerment a Reality- Feedback from discussion sessions. The Scottish Government, 2008. 27 The Scottish Land Fund Evaluation- Final Report, SQW, 2007 28 Draft Third Sector Strategy, Department of Communities and Local Government, 2007

34

4.9. Community Planning and the Concordat 4.9.1. Community planning is increasingly the focus of regeneration policy. The devolution of power to local authorities is further strengthened by the recently concluded Concordat between the Scottish Government and local authorities. 4.9.2. The Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 requires local authorities to initiate and facilitate community planning29. This and subsequent legislation also requires NHS boards, the enterprise networks, the police, the fire and rescue services, and statutory Regional Transport Partnerships to participate. Scottish Ministers and their agencies have a duty to promote and encourage community planning. Other public, private and community bodies should also be invited to participate in community planning, including the voluntary sector, community groups, businesses and business organisations. 4.9.3. The statutory guidance accompanying the legislation identifies two aims for community planning:

• Community engagement – making sure people and communities are genuinely engaged in the decisions made on the public services which affect them.

• Joint working – a commitment from organisations to work together in providing better public services.

4.9.4. These aims are supported by two further principles:

• Rationalisation – community planning should be the overarching partnership framework, helping to coordinate other initiatives and partnerships and where necessary, acting to rationalise a cluttered landscape.

• Connecting local and national priorities – community planning should provide a mechanism to balance national priorities and those at regional, local and neighbourhood levels.

4.9.5. In 2005 Community Planning Partnerships took a more direct role in determining local regeneration priorities. The Social Inclusion Partnerships were abolished and additional funding for the most disadvantaged areas was routed through the Community Regeneration Fund. Community Planning Partnerships had to agree Regeneration Outcome Agreements with Communities Scotland setting out how the CRF would be deployed and monitored. 4.9.6. Following their election, the new Scottish Government negotiated a Concordat with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to set out the terms of a new relationship between local and national tiers of government.30 This has brought, amongst other things, a further increase in local autonomy, characterised by a reduction in ring fencing of funds and the introduction of a single outcome agreement for each local authority, and for Community Planning Partnerships in due course. The deployment of the Fairer Scotland Fund will be part of each authority’s overarching single outcome agreement.

29 Community Planning: An initial review, Audit Scotland, 2006 30 Concordat Between the Scottish Government and Local Government, The Scottish Government / COSLA, 2007

35

4.10. English Policy Developments

4.10.1. Since the advent of the Scottish Parliament in 1999, the writ of Westminster no longer runs in Scottish housing and regeneration policy. Even prior to 1999, there were significant differences between the relevant policies pursued in England and Wales and the direction of travel in Scotland. In many ways these differences have grown over the years since devolution and further divergence may now be expected due to the difference in political complexion between the Scottish and Westminster Governments. 4.10.2. However, an examination of English housing and regeneration policy also reveals significant similarities between the challenges being faced and the form of some of the solutions. Understanding these similarities is a reminder that lessons from England will remain of interest to Scottish policy makers. 4.10.3. The Hills Review of Social Housing31 was conceived by the UK Government as an opportunity to step back and take stock of the issues facing, and the purpose of, social housing. 4.10.4. Hills painted a picture of English social housing which will be familiar to Scottish practitioners, suggesting that it was:

• Increasingly housing those who are most disadvantaged in society. • Largely and increasingly located in the most disadvantaged neighbourhoods. • Improving in physical quality, but seeing deteriorating tenant satisfaction. • Under considerable demand pressure.

4.10.5. The most striking aspect of the report in the context of this study was its focus on the issue of tenant unemployment. Hills highlighted that social rented tenants are more likely to be out of work than those with similarly disadvantaged characteristics in other tenures. A number of causes were suggested for this, including the neighbourhood effects associated with a concentration of social rented housing; the poverty trap associated with claiming Housing Benefit; and the difficulties faced by social rented tenants in moving home. Solutions to these issues suggested by Hills included the involvement of social landlords in employment initiatives; alterations to the conditions for Housing Benefit claiming to include a tapering period; providing a more integrated approach to housing and employment support such as foyers- particularly for young people; and encouraging mobility through schemes such as choice based letting. 4.10.6. The second most striking aspect of the report was the focus on the creation of more socially mixed communities, acknowledging that the construction of new mixed neighbourhoods could only make a limited contribution to this objective. Solutions suggested include the use of vacant land in areas of predominantly social rented tenure to create low cost home ownership options; a general expansion of such options; retaining those on higher incomes through better housing management; and creating more mixed communities through improving the economic situation of existing residents. 4.10.7. In terms of the need to expand the size of the social rented sector, English policy makers have, like their Scottish counterparts, sought to set demanding targets

31 Ends and Means: The Future Role of Social Housing in England, Department of Communities and Local Government, 2007

36

for new build homes32. Within a proposed total new build of 240,000 homes per year, the Government Green Paper proposes that 70,000 homes are affordable; 25,000 for shared ownership/ shared equity; and 45,000 for social rent. There is also an aspiration that these homes should be designed to a high standard; environmentally sustainable; and located in well functioning, mixed, good quality neighbourhoods in which green and public space is well designed and maintained. 4.10.8. The White Paper also:

• Proposes increased involvement by Arms Length Management Organisations and Local Authorities in building new social rented housing.

• Highlights the need for the Housing Corporation to deliver more efficiency in the use of its development funding, with scope for housing associations to borrow more against their assets and achieve efficiency savings.

4.10.9. Under the Housing and Regeneration Bill33 there are a number of changes to the institutional architecture governing housing and regeneration policy. In contrast to Scotland, a new non departmental government body has been created, the Housing and Communities Agency, by merging most of the functions of English Partnerships, the Housing Corporation and the Department of Communities and Local Government. Although the Scottish approach has been to bring most of the functions of Communities Scotland into a mainstream Government department, there is clearly a similar desire to create synergies by having those focusing on housing and regeneration working within the same organisation. 4.10.10. Like their Scottish counterparts, English housing associations are facing a new regulatory regime. The Office for Tenants and Social Landlords proposed in the current Housing and Regeneration Bill aims to create a sharper focus on protecting the needs of tenants, and reducing the amount of red tape and regulation facing good social landlords. 4.10.11. The proposals have been developed based on the conclusions of the Cave Review which proposed:

• A separation between the bodies regulating social housing and providing development funding.

• The regulator being independent of the government, but subject to strategic direction on rent levels and standards.

• The Regulator having the objective to empower and protect tenants. • Less regulation for housing associations that perform well. • Tenants and local authorities being able to trigger investigation from the regulator by providing evidence of poor performance.

• A duty for landlords to engage constructively with local authorities in their place shaping function.

• The setting up of a national tenant voice. 4.10.12. The Bill has been subject of considerable criticism from the housing association movement, with concerns focusing on their independent status3435:

32 Homes for the Future, More Affordable, More Sustainable, Department for Communities and Local Government 2007. 33 Housing and Regeneration Bill, Department for Communities and Local Government, 2007 34 The Housing Bill; Eight Key Threats, National Housing Federation Campaign Release, January 2008 35 Member Briefing on the Government Amendments to the Housing and Regeneration Bill, National Housing Federation, March 2008

37

• The potential for the legal status of housing associations to change to that of public sector bodies, with knock-on effects for their ability to access private sector funding.

• Its implications in terms of the regulation of non housing activity for stifling innovation and flexibility.

• The potential for ‘policy passporting’ with the regulator forcing associations to contribute to the delivery of a range of government policies.

4.10.13. There are striking similarities between developments in English Local Government and the direction shown through the development of the Concordat. English local authorities have already been required to develop a Sustainable Communities Strategy36. They will now be required to create a delivery plan for the delivery of this strategy, through Local Area Agreements (LAAs)37. A clear expectation is placed on local authorities that they will deliver services more effectively and efficiently; work more closely with each other and with other partners; and increase the use of fair and open competition in tendering for services. 4.10.14. These LAAs will set out a single set of targets negotiated between the Government, local authorities and other local partners. This aims to guarantee national minimum standards, but leave room for local innovation and local priorities. There is a duty placed on local authorities to come together with other partners and work together to agree these priorities. 4.10.15. The proposed new performance monitoring framework will be significantly simpler than the current system. There will be 35 priorities for each area and progress towards their achievement will be measured by a much shorter list of 200 indicators. 4.10.16. Although most of the Housing Corporation’s functions will be subsumed within the new Homes and Communities Agency, the organisation’s Neighbourhoods and Community Strategy38 closely reflects the subject of this study, focusing on five themes. 4.10.17. The ‘Working Together’ theme focuses on how housing associations can work in partnership with local authorities and others to deliver for local communities. Housing associations are seen as key potential partners for local authorities, having significant delivery capacity and expertise and a close relationship with local communities. The strategy acknowledges that current levels of involvement in Local Strategic Partnerships vary considerably, suggesting that non involvement makes it difficult for housing associations to align their work with local strategies. The strategy recommends that associations seek active engagement in Local Strategic Partnerships, individually or through agreeing joint representatives with other associations; that they work with other associations to influence the development of local housing and other strategies; and they consider carefully the rationale for retaining stock in areas in which they do not have the capacity to contribute, or the level of stock to justify contributing to, local housing strategies. 4.10.18. The second theme, ‘Sustaining Mixed Communities’, sets out how housing associations can contribute to delivering and sustaining successful, mixed communities. The Housing Corporation is focusing its attention on creating mixed communities where there are major regeneration projects; issues of low and high

36 Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act, Department for Communities and Local Government 2007 37 Strong and Prosperous Communities, Department for Communities and Local Government, 2007. 38 Neighbourhoods and Communities Strategy, Housing Corporation, 2006

38

demand; and mono-tenure estates. The strategy suggests that housing associations should consider how they support mixed tenure communities; working with others to balance the pressures of meeting housing needs and creating mixed communities; looking at choice based letting schemes; taking early action on polarisation; and actively engaging in initiatives to create inclusive and cohesive communities. 4.10.19. The third theme, ‘Adding Community Value’, highlights the growing role of housing associations as social entrepreneurs and neighbourhood level delivery agents in addition to their core housing role. Housing associations are seen as well placed to improve life chances and opportunities for the tenants and communities that they serve, based on their established community presence, local leadership, sound asset base and business skills. The strategy mentions a range of activities in which the sector is involved, including employment and training initiatives, the building and running of community centres, youth outreach work, financial inclusion and public space projects. 4.10.20. The business case for housing associations to take this broader action is clearly indicated- to protect and enhance their previous investment in communities. It acknowledges that there can be tension between the efficiency agenda and seeking to add community value, but suggests that more flexible interpretations of value for money can get round such issues. 4.10.21. The strategy suggests that housing associations consider the business case for community regeneration action. They should look to deliver in the context of local strategies and work with other associations wherever possible. The potential role of associations as a support for the social enterprise and wider third sectors is recognised, either directly through finance or practical support, or through procurement. 4.10.22. The Housing Corporation acknowledges that the sector needs to be able to better demonstrate the added value that it brings to communities and commits to working closely with the National Housing Federation in the ongoing development of evaluation tools for this purpose. 4.10.23. The strategy’s fourth theme is ‘Building Respect’, under which it details the critical role of housing associations in tackling anti-social behaviour. The strategy acknowledges that the sector has contributed to local partnerships focused on anti social behaviour and has delivered a wide spectrum of projects from neighbourhood management and warden schemes to youth diversionary initiatives. The sector is encouraged to continue to work to develop and implement anti social behaviour strategies, including neighbourhood management and neighbourhood warden schemes. It is also invited to consider how else they might contribute to the anti social behaviour agenda, using feedback from residents to shape their agenda and working with others to develop prevention and diversion initiatives. 4.10.24. The fifth theme, ‘Empowering Communities’, focuses on the critical importance of residents and communities informing the work of housing associations and holding them to account. The strategy reports the considerable amount of innovative action being taken forward by the sector in this area, such as resident-led inspection and resident audits. It welcomes the conclusions of the NHF’s Resident Involvement Commission39. This suggests that housing associations must begin by getting the basics right and treating tenants as paying customers; giving tenants real

39 What Tenants Want, Report of the Tenant Involvement Commission, National Housing Federation 2006.

39

choice in their housing and management options; involving them as individuals and collectively in decisions; showing that they can have real influence over their housing and neighbourhoods; and supporting, training and developing their ability to be involved. 4.10.25. The strategy states that housing associations should build on their experience of involving residents and continue to develop their own involvement strategies. They should support the development of wider involvement networks in their communities and the wider involvement of their tenants in community issues; incorporate the involvement of their tenants and other residents into the heart of what they do, their mainstream activity and their broader community regeneration and neighbourhood work; act as a ‘hub’, building the capacity of local residents and organisations; and use their assets directly or indirectly to do so.

4.11 The ‘In Business for Neighbourhoods Initiative’ 4.11.1. In 2003 the National Housing Federation launched its In Business for Neighbourhoods Initiative (inBiz). The initiative is based around the following commitments to which all housing associations wishing to become involved must sign up:

‘To neighbourhoods

• We will put neighbourhoods at the heart of everything we do. • We will promote neighbourhoods where there is a place for everyone, with positive support for diversity of people and places. • We will work in partnership with local people, councils and other agencies, and will champion local needs. • Each of our members will be open and explicit about its role in neighbourhoods where it works, and about the time and money invested in them.

‘To customers

• Customers are the driving force behind our business. • We will listen to them, respond to their views and engage them in our work at all levels. • We will offer them respect, choice and support. • We will do everything we can to prevent neighbourhood problems, and will deal firmly with people who are bad neighbours.

‘To excellence

• We will pursue excellence and improvement. • We will make the changes needed, so our organisations can rise to the challenge of being iN. • We will work with regulators and inspectors to build a culture of challenge and change. • We aim to be landlords, employers and partners of choice40.’

4.11.2. In Business for Neighbourhoods was born out of an awareness that the housing association sector in England had a reputational problem, a situation that could be described as ‘individual success, collective failure’, where despite the excellence of individual associations, the image of the sector as a whole was being

40 Commitments available at www.inbiz.org

40

determined by its worst performing members. Some of the negative images included the sense that the sector was populated by ‘fat cats’ and was unaccountable. 4.11.3. The promises were designed to be specific enough to be meaningful, but sufficiently flexible to cover most relevant areas of activity. 4.11.4. The process of setting up In Business for Neighbourhoods was long and resource intensive. The emphasis throughout was on consultation with NHF members, to ensure real ownership of the brand. The NHF worked closely throughout the development process with housing associations that they had identified as having real influence within the sector, creating champions to support the work. They also ensured that they had signed up a critical mass of associations before the launch. A one-off fee was charged to sign up to In Business for Neighbourhoods which raised £1.8m fund the first 18 months of the initiative. 4.11.5. The initiative was designed to evolve over time. Initially NHF provided a major input to raise awareness across the housing association sector. In its second phase the onus is on In Business for Neighbourhoods members themselves to generate the media coverage for their work. InBiz is intended to be a self perpetuating programme at the end of 10 years. 4.11.6. In addition to the commitments highlighted above In Business for Neighbourhoods has used the following tools:

• The creation of a brand, designed as a ‘short cut’ to understanding what the initiative is about. The NHF are keen to emphasise that In Business for Neighbourhoods cannot be reduced to that brand alone.

• The production of literature, highlighting the work of housing associations to other partners.

• The production of article templates to help associations publicise particular issues.

• A dedicated website, www.inbiz.org. This contains copies of the In Business for Neighbourhoods newsletter, details of those associations who have signed up to the initiative, news stories, case studies of associations doing work in this field and electronic versions of the InBiz publications.

4.11.7. In Business for Neighbourhoods involved a considerable amount of face to face awareness-raising in its early stages. This is seen as crucial to the success of the campaign, to get beyond chief executives and reach other senior managers. However, it has never involved the delivery of a training programme focused on community regeneration, nor has its focus been on the creation of a vehicle for the detailed sharing of good practice. 4.11.8. The NHF view In Business for Neighbourhoods as a success, estimating that at least 80% of the stock within the sector is now covered by associations who have signed up to it. They believe that it has played an important role in changing the attitudes of public sector partners, having been successful in shaping the language used around the issues, which has in turn influenced the reality. They see it as being a key part of the developing awareness amongst ministers and policy-makers of the broader contributions that housing associations can make to creating successful communities. To some extent, the NHF view the setting up of the Housing and Communities Agency as reflecting the work of the initiative. 4.11.9. One of the challenges that has faced In Business for Neighbourhoods has been the sheer size of the sector in England. It is not possible to get to everyone with huge

41

amounts of written material. The success of the initiative is therefore very dependent on people being prepared to take things forward locally. The Welsh Federation was recently able to do TV adverts about the sector; the costs of doing so across England would be prohibitive.

4.12. Key Findings from Policy and Practice Review 4.12.1. The following specific future policy developments are of particular relevance to this study:

• The Scottish Government will continue to invest directly in Wider Role through a dedicated fund for the next three years. During 2008 the priorities for this fund will be reviewed;

• The Scottish Government will support social enterprise through direct investment, infrastructure and capacity support and by opening up public sector procurement. Housing associations are unlikely to benefit from direct investment as they have dedicated funding through Wider Role, although their social enterprise subsidiaries might. A new action plan is expected in Spring 2008;

• Local authorities have made a commitment to grow the turnover of the social economy in their Concordat with the Scottish Government;

• The Scottish Government will publish proposals for promoting Community Empowerment in spring 2008.

4.12.2. Looking across the broad policy agenda discussed above, a number of key themes are evident. These themes are primarily driven by the Scottish Government’s overriding objective to grow the Scottish economy, but they also support other policy objectives. In the context of community regeneration, this prompts a number of challenges for housing associations:

• The importance of place-making: In Firm Foundations, the Scottish Government has highlighted the need to increase the supply of housing. Drawing lessons from the mistakes of the past, it recognises that this can only be successful within the context of well-functioning neighbourhoods with a mix of people and good access to jobs and services. Housing associations will face the challenge of:

o Meet the Scottish Government’s aspirations by improving the quality of life in disadvantaged neighbourhoods, improving services and promoting employment opportunities;

o Using the procurement of housing investment and maintenance programmes to generate new job and training opportunities for unemployed people;

o Promoting community engagement and empowerment, giving people a greater stake in their community and enhances their sense of belonging;

o Using their relationship with tenants to engage hard to reach groups.

• Promoting greater efficiency: the Scottish Government is promoting greater efficiencies in the public sector and agencies that deliver services with the help of public money, (including housing associations), so that service improvements do not place a greater burden on the private sector. Housing associations will face the challenges of:

42

o Ensuring engagement in community regeneration supports a housing association’s overall business strategy, delivers business benefits and enhances the value for money provided by the whole organisation;

o Working with other associations and third sector organisations on community regeneration to deliver projects, exploiting economies of scale and sharing expertise.

o Demonstrating that community regeneration activity is delivering value for money, for example that contracting with social enterprises is delivering value for money.

• Increasing productive capacity: the Scottish Government wants as many people as possible to contribute to economic growth. This has two implications in the context of this study. First, by promoting social enterprise, the Scottish Government hopes to release untapped productive capacity and reduce grant dependency. Second, social enterprises (including housing associations) are seen as organisations that can effectively engage hard to reach clients, particularly the economically inactive, and draw them into productive activity to benefit both the nation and themselves. Housing associations will need to:

o Have the intent, the opportunities and the skills to embrace the higher risks that a more enterprising culture implies;

o Focus community regeneration activity more sharply on the economically inactive – this agenda primarily embraces employment and training, but can also be linked to health, financial inclusion and other issues;

o Demonstrate that they are well placed through their relationship with their tenants and through their physical location in disadvantaged communities to access the hard to reach clients;

o Capitalise on and help to deliver the Scottish Government’s wish to grow the social enterprise sector.

• Devolving more decisions to the local level: Local authorities and Community Planning Partnerships will have a greater say than before in determining local priorities. Housing associations will need to:

o Improve their engagement with local authorities and Community Planning Partnerships, particularly as Communities Scotland was, rightly or wrongly, seen to be their proxy and its abolition removes a key link to Community Planning Partnerships and Local Social Economy Partnerships;

o Help local authorities to deliver their commitment to grow the Social Economy, made in the Concordat with the Scottish Government;

o Consider the role they play in promoting community engagement and empowerment as a leader, enabler or an advocate;

o Explore the development of their role as Community Anchor Organisations, particularly where the control of assets and services is devolved below the local authority level.

43

5. Analysis of Communities Scotland Wider Role

Funding 5.1. Introduction

5.1.1. The recently published evaluation of the Wider Role funding programme41 provides a comprehensive statistical analysis and commentary on grant approvals by Communities Scotland in the three financial years 2003-04 to 2005-06. For this report we have been able to provide an analysis of project approvals for 2006-07, although no funding data could be made available. 5.1.2. Communities Scotland approved 879 Wider Role projects in the period 2003-04 to 2006-07, an average of 220 per annum, (Table 1).

Table 1: Annual Wider Role Project Approvals 2003-04 to 2006-07

Financial Year Number of Projects Approved

Funding Awarded

2003-04 238 £11,667,930 2004-05 222 £11,636,267

2005-06 195 £7,456,849

2006-07 224 No data TOTAL 879 £30,761,04642

Source: Communities Scotland TRS Grant Management System 5.1.3. More than 40% of project approvals were located in Glasgow and a further 30% in North & South Clyde and South West Scotland (Table 2). This reflects the concentration of urban deprivation in Glasgow, Renfrewshire, Inverclyde, Dunbartonshire and Lanarkshire. It may also reflect the prevalence of community-based housing associations in and around Glasgow.

41 Evaluation of the Wider Role Funding Programme, Communities Scotland, Precis 115, Research Report 97, Communities Scotland 2008 42 2003/04-2005/06 only

44

Table 2:Wider Role Projects Approved by area

Area Office Number of Projects Approved 2003/04-2006/07

%

Glasgow 381 43% Grampian 54 6%

Highlands and Islands 52 6%

Lothian, Borders and Fife 63 7% North and South Clyde 175 20%

South West Scotland 85 10%

Tayside and Forth Valley 69 8% TOTAL 879 100%

Source: Communities Scotland TRS Grant Management System 5.1.4. A very large proportion of the projects were devoted to delivery, with only 7% being used to build housing association capacity (Table 3). The evaluation reported that this was significant as the 2003 Policy Statements and housing associations themselves reported a continuing lack of skills and capacity.

Table 3: Purpose of Grant Total 2003/04-

2006/07

%

Developing regeneration activity 161 18%

Delivering regeneration activity 642 73% RSL organisational capacity to deliver activity

62 7%

Incomplete data 14 2%

TOTAL 879 100%

Source: Communities Scotland TRS Grant Management System

5.1.5. A very wide range of projects have been supported by the programme (Table 4). The most frequently reported category of project supported the provision of community facilities, workspaces, etc. – reflecting housing associations’ acknowledged expertise and comfort with property development. The next most frequently reported activity was in employment and training (12%) and more than one third of these initiatives were also related to construction activity in 2006/07. The remaining thirteen categories each accounted for less than 10% of project approvals.

45

Table 4: Thematic Focus on Projects

Number of Projects 2003/04-2006/07

%

Community care services 18 2% Childcare services 11 1%

Education and learning initiatives 37 4%

Employment & training schemes 109 12% Debt, money advice and welfare rights

47 5%

Environmental clean ups, maintenance etc

50 6%

Sustainable development (e.g. recycling)

40 5%

Community health initiatives 32 4% Community arts, cultural, recreational events

74 8%

ICT & digital inclusion projects 34 4%

Community safety initiatives (e.g. CCTV)

42 5%

Community transport services 2 0%

Youth services and initiatives 69 8% Community facilities, workspaces, accom.

167 19%

Homelessness and housing/tenancy support

25 3%

Other 122 14%

TOTAL 879 100%

Source: Communities Scotland TRS Grant Management System

5.2. Conclusions

5.2.1. The pattern of project approvals in the fourth year of the programme was not markedly different from the three preceding years. Consequently the results are broadly similar to those reported in the evaluation. Around 220 projects per year were funded, they were geographically concentrated on Clydeside and they covered a very wide range of types of project.

46

6. Research with Housing Associations and

Regeneration Stakeholders 6.1.1. This section outlines the research findings presented under five topic headings: the involvement of housing associations in wider role; promotion of social enterprise; promotion of community empowerment; community planning; and options for the SFHA to better support the sector’s involvement in community regeneration. 6.1.2. The research analysis presented here gives a very useful overview of the state of opinion on the engagement of housing associations in community regeneration, across the sector itself and amongst other regeneration stakeholders. That said, it is essential to acknowledge that those housing associations who were interviewed as part of the process were selected because of their overall strong reputation. Those who responded to the survey will to some extent have been self selecting, doing so because they already have an interest in or knowledge of the areas covered. 6.1.3. With regard to terminology, there is no distinction drawn within the report between those associations who were interviewed singly and those who participated in focus groups - all are referred to as ‘interviewees’. There use of he or she to refer to comments by single interviewees is also entirely random to assist in the preservation of anonymity.

Introductory Note- Interpreting the Scorecard 6.1.4. The Rocket Science Scorecard used as part of this research asked questions in a number of different formats:

• Basic factual questions were posed about the respondents’ organisation, for example asking them to indicate the appropriate category of housing associations to which they belong.

• Further factual questions were posed, asking respondents to indicate which of a range of options best described their involvement in and knowledge of different types of activity.

• Respondents were also given the opportunity to give more detailed, open ended responses at various points within the scorecard.

• Respondents were asked to indicate which one of five qualitative statements most closely reflected their views on an issue.

6.1.5. The final type of question is designed to turn qualitative perceptions into scores that can be compared across issues and across time, and that seek to generate a better understanding of the average views of those surveyed. The scorecard works by asking correspondents to indicate which of five graduated statements they agree with. 6.1.6. Three examples of sets of statements used within this scorecard are set out below:

For the sub topic of ‘Current Engagement in Wider Role’ • Statement 1: My organisation has no current involvement in wider role activity. • Statement 2: My organisation has limited involvement in wider role activity. • Statement 3: My organisation has some involvement in wider role activity. • Statement 4: My organisation has significant involvement in wider role activity. • Statement 5: Wider role activity is a central part of the work that my organisation does.

47

For the sub topic of ‘Extent of Perceived Barriers’

• Statement 1: I believe that there are very significant barriers to the further development of wider role activity by housing associations.

• Statement 2: I believe that there are significant barriers to the further development of wider role activity by housing associations.

• Statement 3: I believe that there are some barriers to the further development of wider role activity by housing associations.

• Statement 4: I believe that there are a few barriers to the further development of wider role activity by housing associations.

• Statement 5: I believe that there are no barriers to the further development of wider role activity by housing associations.

For the sub topic of ‘Sustainability’

• Statement 1: My organisation finds it extremely difficult to sustain any of its wider role projects in the longer term.

• Statement 2: My organisation finds it difficult to sustain most of its wider role projects in the longer term.

• Statement 3: My organisation has some difficulty sustaining some of its wider role projects in the longer term.

• Statement 4: My organisation is generally able to sustain its wider role activities in the longer term.

• Statement 5: My organisation is nearly always able to sustain its wider role activities in the longer term.

6.1.7. From this is it should be noted that an average mean score is one of 3. It should also be noted that higher scores indicate higher levels of involvement, better functioning and fewer barriers.

6.2. Characteristics of Respondents

6.2.1. A total of 57 housing associations completed the survey. The profile of respondents is shown in the graphs below.

Chart 1: Characteristics of Housing Association Respondents- Size

Size of housing stock

17

15

12

10

21

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

0-500 5-1,000 1-2,000 2,000-5,000

5,000-10,000

10,000plus.

No. of Housing Associations

48

Chart 2: Characteristics of Housing Association Respondents- Type of

Housing Association

Type of housing association

3 3

19

13

28

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Nationalgeneralist

Nationalspecialist

Regionalgeneralist

Regionalspecialist

Localauthoritystocktransfer

CommunityBased/

Housing Co-op

No. of Housing Associations

6.2.2. A total of 94 regeneration partners completed the survey. The profile of respondents is shown in the graphs below. Chart 3: Characteristics of Regeneration Stakeholder Respondents- Type of Housing Association

Organisation Type

22

20

13

11

8

6

4

0

5

10

15

20

25

CommunityPlanningPartnership

ScottishGovernment

Local VoluntaryOrganisation

SocialEnterprise

SocialEnterprise

InfrastructureOrganisation

NationalVoluntaryOrganisation

Member ofCVS Network

No. of re

spondents

49

6.3. Promoting Wider Role

Defining Wider Role 6.3.1. There was consistency in the definitions of wider role activity offered by housing association interviewees. 6.3.2. The word ‘community’ was regularly included in the definition, many seeing wider role as aiming at the creation of successful communities. The word community was also used to denote that a number of housing associations felt that wider role included them discharging their responsibilities to a community that was broader than the tenants that they serve. 6.3.3. Definitions also made regular use of terms such as ‘economic and social well being/ inclusion’, highlighting the view of associations that wider role is about seeking to have a broader impact on the communities they serve than can be achieved by solely focusing on housing issues. This view was similarly reflected in the description from others of wider role being about ‘going beyond bricks and mortar.’ 6.3.4. It was noticeable that many interviewees did not feel that any definition that they were able to offer fully reflected what they were seeking to do through wider role. It was common for interviewees to highlight the actual range of activities in which they were involved- for example employment and training and financial inclusion work. It is clear that wider role is not an area of work that is easy to encapsulate in ‘pat’ definitions. 6.3.5. Regeneration partner interviewees offered similar definitions, referring to wider role as encompassing a broad spectrum of social, economic and environmental activity by housing associations beyond their traditional role in developing and managing houses. Current Involvement in Wider Role Activity Range of activity 6.3.6. Interviewees were involved in a huge range of activity, only one of those interviewed described their association as having limited involvement in wider role (and even that interviewee could be viewed as passing too harsh a judgement on his organisation). 6.3.7. There is not the space here to reflect in any detail the range of activities being undertaken by interviewees, but a representative (though non exhaustive) sample of such work would include:

• Training and employment as part of investment contracts. • Welfare rights and money advice. • Links with local credit unions and other financial inclusion work. • Energy advice. • Tenancy sustainment. • Adult literacy provision. • Development of community facilities and community learning centres. • Development of refuge facilities for Women’s Aid projects. • Environmental improvement works involving local communities. • Development of play parks. • Youth work, including work with schools and youth justice work. • Advocacy work.

50

6.3.8. Interviewees very much categorised their wider role involvement by subject area, focusing on what they were delivering in terms of employment and training, environmental improvements, financial inclusion etc. The focus of the scorecard and on many of the prompts used was on characterising the wider role contributions of housing associations through a typology. This may suggest that interviewees have not until now been used to explicitly stating the roles that they can play in broader community regeneration, i.e. the offer that they can make to other partners. Working in partnership 6.3.9. There was no consistent position taken by interviewees on whether they generally preferred to deliver these activities in partnership with other organisations, for example delivering youth work through local youth clubs, or whether they delivered them themselves, for example directly providing welfare rights services to tenants. Most common was a case by case approach, with partnerships being built where felt to be necessary, but others expressed definite preferences either to deliver work internally, or through partners. Levels of engagement

6.3.10. Responses to the scorecard provided some strongly suggestive results in relation to the levels of engagement of housing associations, and different types of housing associations, in different aspects of wider role activity. The mean score of 3.6 from housing association scorecard respondents in relation to the level of their wider role activity suggests considerable involvement from the sector. 6.3.11. Housing associations are particularly active in terms of securing funding for wider role activity (67%) and in delivering regeneration activity. However, only 32% of housing associations are themselves providing funding for wider role activity, perhaps the role that requires the highest level of their commitment. It is also noticeable that only 42% see themselves as playing the role of trusted intermediary- linking tenants to other services in the community - despite this role being a critical part of the potential offer of associations to other community regeneration partners, and not necessarily requiring the commitment of high levels of financial resources. Chart 4: Housing Associations’ Current Involvement in Wider Role Activity

Current Involvement in Wider Role Activity

40%44%

33%

60%

32%

67%

42%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Initiatingregeneration-

Partnership

Acting as acommunity

anchor

Planningregeneration

Deliveringregeneration

Providingfunding

Securingfunding

Acting as atrusted

intermediary

% o

f all respondents

51

Differences between national/ regional and community based/ stock transfer

housing associations 6.3.12. There are significant differences between the level of involvement of national/ regional housing associations and stock transfer/ CBHAs in the delivery of wider role. The average score for the former in terms of engagement in wider role activity was 3.4, the score for the latter 3.8. 6.3.13. These differences were seen even more clearly when scorecard respondents’ described their involvement in wider role activity. Stock transfer/ CBHAs indicated a higher level of current activity than regional/ national associations in five out of the seven of the defined categories of involvement. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the largest gap between the two was on the issue of playing the role of community anchor. Some 58% of stock transfer/ CBHAs indicated that they took on this role compared with only 27% of regional/ national associations. Large differences were also seen in the roles of delivering regeneration, (68% to 50%) and securing funding, (74% to 58%). In only two categories, that of providing funding and planning regeneration, did national/ regional associations report more involvement than their stock transfer/ CBHA colleagues, perhaps reflecting their greater financial strength. Views of regeneration stakeholders

6.3.14. Most regeneration stakeholders could give examples of housing associations’ wider role projects they had come across in the course of their work. Housing Associations were most strongly associated by those completing the Scorecard with delivering regeneration activity (68%) and more than half recognised their roles as a trusted intermediary, community anchor and in securing funding. 6.3.15. However fewer than 40% thought housing association initiated partnerships and only around one third thought they provided funding or were involved in planning regeneration. Chart 5: Regeneration Stakeholders’ Perceptions of Housing Associations’

Current Involvement in Wider Role Activity

Perception of Housing Associations' Engagement in Wider Role Activity

68%61%

52% 52%

39%35% 32%

76%71% 71%

66% 66%

52%

61%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Deliveringregeneration,

e.g. physical,social,

environmental,

facilities

Acting as atrusted

intermediary-linking tenants to

services

Acting as acommunity

anchor -providing a focalpoint for local

communities,community

organisationsand services

Securing funding Initiatingregeneration-

Partnership

Providingfunding

Planningregeneration,

e.g. masterplanning, serviceplanning, needs

assessment

Activity Type

% o

f re

sp

on

den

ts

% Believing HAs are currently engaged

% Believing there is a future role for HAs

52

6.3.16. All regeneration stakeholder interviewees had some experience of housing association regeneration activity and one was aware of a significant volume of such. Everyone felt that housing associations were making a positive and valuable contribution to regeneration initiatives, although one felt that there was not a clear enough rationale for housing associations being involved as opposed to other potential partners. Wider Role and Partnership Working with Other Associations

6.3.17. There was considerable variance between the housing association interviewees in the extent of their partnership working with other associations in the delivery of wider role. 6.3.18. Most interviewees were engaged in partnership working of some kind, although some suggested that their engagement was limited. Where this was the case, it appeared to stem either from operating in an area with few other potential partners, or from being far more experienced and active in wider role than other local partners, who were seen as ‘still catching up.’ 6.3.19. Other interviewees reported working in partnership with other associations on a case by case basis where projects offered opportunities, or where the scale of projects required it. Partnership working on wider role between associations is also clearly a feature of major physical regeneration projects involving more than one association. 6.3.20. Some associations have become involved in more or less formal partnerships seeking to take forward their wider role agenda. These associations do not necessarily deliver all their wider role activity in this way, but the partnerships do help to identify opportunities and develop a common agenda. Sometimes these partnerships have developed, or have access to, their own independent resources. Reasons for Involvement in Wider Role 6.3.21. Scorecard respondents were asked to assess the importance of the social and business cases for wider role in their development of this area of activity. The respective scores of 4.5 for the social case and 2.6 for the business case, demonstrate the much greater importance of the former in their justification of their expansion beyond bricks and mortar. A number of respondents found the business case to be of limited importance to their engagement in wider role. Importance of the social case 6.3.22. These views were reflected by housing association interviewees. Commonly involvement in wider role simply stemmed from interviewees’ awareness of the range of problems impacting on the communities and tenants they serve. In some cases, a degree of specialisation historically with a particularly vulnerable client group had pushed them to recognise the extra needs of those they worked with. One interviewee vividly expressed that her association had a ‘moral obligation’ to tackle the issues facing their community. 6.3.23. Other interviewees highlighted the importance of recognising that their assets allowed them to play a wider role in community regeneration. Some saw wider role as a ‘better use of their financial muscle’ i.e. their reserves and asset base, than other potential areas of diversification.

53

6.13.24. The assets of associations that were usable for wider role activity were not seen by interviewees as solely financial. Interviewees were keenly aware of the importance of their close relationship with tenants, which helped them to deliver wider role activity. In particular, interviewees referred to the trust that can develop between landlord and tenant, and to the ability of the landlord to take early action by identifying and responding to problems before other public agencies even became aware of the issue. Interviewees were clear that wider role seemed to be a natural extension of their function as a landlord. Business case

6.3.25. The business case for engagement in wider role was not ignored by interviewees. A number were aware of the extent to which wider role work might offer the opportunity to impact on key business variables such as rent arrears and tenancy sustainment. However, even these responses were tempered with the acknowledgement that the business case for action was often not placed at the top of their agenda. 6.3.26. Interviewees did, however, offer an alternative business rationale for engagement in wider role activity. Many saw it as part of their attempt to strengthen and diversify their business, to grow as an organisation, to extend their influence and to enhance their reputation amongst potential partners. 6.3.27. One interviewee also stressed the business importance of the community development aspect of wider role. Her association had been involved in a number of developments which had been controversial amongst the local communities which would be ‘hosting’ them. Wider role work had helped to reassure the community about the ability of the association to deal with the full range of issues experienced by their tenants and demonstrate its ‘bona fides’ with the community by generating a range of broader benefits.

Responsibility for Development of Wider Role 6.3.28. A considerable majority of those housing associations interviewed allocated responsibility for wider role work to designated members of staff. In some cases one individual was allocated full time to wider role work, in other cases teams had been created to take forward this agenda. One interviewee was involved with a number of other associations in commissioning support to develop wider role from an independent social enterprise. 6.3.29. Not every association interviewed had designated specific staff, responsible solely for this work. One saw the role of wider role development as being shared across a number of people within the organisation on a case by case basis, although two members of staff had responsibility for wider role as part of a broader range of their duties. Whole Organisation Approach to Wider Role

6.3.30. Interviewees consistently expressed the ambition to take a whole organisation approach to promoting wider role activity, some expressing the view that the role of other frontline staff was essential in the successful delivery of wider role projects. 6.3.31. However, interviewees reported sometimes limited success in implementing such an approach. Success was most common on a case by case basis, where the nature of a project compelled other staff to get involved.

54

6.3.32. The attitudes of other staff were a viewed as a key determinant of success. Some were enthusiastic about their involvement in wider role work, which they saw as an interesting complement and support to their mainstream tasks. However, wider role could be the subject of some resistance. Some interviewees reported dealings with staff who felt that wider role should not be part of their job and who were resistant to changing their way of working in response to some of the opportunities offered through wider role work. 6.3.33. There was no clear sense from the interviews that any one particular structure involving specialist staff working on wider role was better than another in encouraging other staff to take some ownership of the work. Neither interviewees working in separate teams, nor those working in subsidiary organisations, felt that their organisational structure was a major inhibition to joint working with their colleagues. 6.3.34. However, interviewees did consistently suggest that all specialist staff working in wider role did face the challenge of avoiding other staff seeking to pass off wider role activity onto them. Future Engagement in Wider Role Extent of interest in future involvement 6.3.35. Both interviewees and scorecard respondents demonstrated considerable enthusiasm for getting more involved in wider role activity. 6.3.36. Interviewees’ enthusiasm was typically expressed by highlighting both a general desire to get more involved and by the wish to do more in specific areas of activity. Many interviewees highlighting specific intentions to do more work in areas such as financial inclusion. One suggested that her association was ‘hugely ambitious’ to do more wider role work. 6.3.37. For many interviewees the future of their wider role engagement appears to be to continue along the same lines, deepening and extending their existing involvement, but not making a distinctive jump forward from levels of current activity. This is supported by the scorecard result for the question exploring willingness to further engage. The fact that the mean score was lower for future (3.2) than current engagement (3.7) does not suggest a sector about to reduce wider role activity, but rather a commitment to a modest expansion of a range of existing activities. 6.3.38. Further evidence of the desire of the housing association sector to expand its involvement in wider role activity comes from its response to the specific questions about the contributions that it sees itself making in the future. The chart below sets out the extent to which there is ambition within the housing association sector for future engagement in wider role:

55

Chart 6: Housing Associations’ Current and Future Involvement in Wider Role

Activity

Current and Future Involvement in Wider Role Activity

40%44%

33%

60%

32%

67%

42%

58%

51%46%

65%

35%

68%

46%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Initiatingregeneration-Partnership

Acting as acommunityanchor

Planningregeneration

Deliveringregeneration

Providingfunding

Securingfunding

Acting as atrusted

intermediary

% o

f all respondents

% currently involved

% involved in the future

6.3.39. As can be seen, there is a desire to do more in each category of activity. One word of caution should be noted here. There is a clear difference between expressing the desire to do more in the abstract and actually doing it in practice. It is noticeable that only 35% of respondents are considering providing funding for future wider role work – an indicator of more serious commitment. Drivers for future involvement 6.3.40. Interviewees highlighted a couple of specific factors which they saw as potentially driving the sector to increase its involvement in wider role activity. Firm Foundations strongly suggests that fewer housing associations will be involved in development activity in the longer term. Those associations no longer involved in development activity may seek to turn their attention elsewhere, perhaps developing into more general community regeneration agencies. 6.3.41. Other associations were expecting to be involved in major stock transfer, refurbishment and redevelopment projects. They recognised that wider role activities could make a significant contribution to creating well functioning mixed communities as part of these initiatives. Differences between national/ regional and community based/ stock transfer

housing associations 6.3.42. There are some significant differences between the attitudes of national/ regional housing associations and those of stock transfer associations/ CBHAs. The average score relating to the extent of future plans for the former is 2.9, for the latter 3.3. Some of the gaps between the responses for some of the areas of activity from different parts of the sector decreased. However, it is noticeable that stock transfer/ CBHA associations showed much greater enthusiasm for becoming community anchors than their national/regional counterparts. 6.3.43. Regeneration stakeholders were also keen to see housing associations do more in wider role work and this was the case in every category of action and by between 10% and 29% of respondents.

56

Views of regeneration stakeholders

6.3.44. Two key themes emerged from regeneration stakeholder interviewees about the directions in which associations’ wider role involvement should develop. Firstly, there was recognition that housing associations enjoyed a good and trusted relationship with their tenants and other individuals in the community, many of whom were in hard to reach groups. They saw the potential for housing associations to do more to deliver services to them; to signpost them to services or opportunities; and to facilitate their better access to other organisations. 6.3.45. Secondly, a number of interviewees felt there was the potential for housing associations, particularly community based associations, to develop as community anchor organisations. It was felt that some were already acting in this role, but there was a real opportunity for them to become stronger focal points for the community and to bring voluntary and community groups together. There was also the potential to own and develop a wider range of assets than just housing. 6.3.46. A particular strength for housing associations was seen as being the understanding that they are “here to stay” at the heart of their communities. Communities trust them because they often have tenant representation on their committees and have a physical presence within areas that cannot disappear. Other agencies recognise that their ownership of assets, and the regulatory framework under which they operate, give them financial and organisational strength terms of governance and accountability that other local organisations cannot match. It was suggested that this can be particularly important in rural areas which often do not have the same concentration of third sector organisations that urban areas enjoy. Barriers to Involvement in Wider Role Extent of barriers 6.3.47. Scorecard respondents gave a clear indication that the sector experiences barriers to sustaining and becoming more involved in wider role activity. A significant number of respondents find that these barriers are significant. 6.3.48. Housing association interviewees gave a similar impression. Although none gave a sense of being faced by barriers sufficient to deter them from sustaining or growing their involvement, almost everyone expressed frustrations of one kind or another. The range of barriers to greater/ sustained involvement in wider role was striking. It included funding; capacity issues; policy and regulatory change; community planning processes; and internal barriers. Funding barriers 6.3.49. Interviewees made a number of general comments about funding which are likely to be common to any set of organisations seeking support from the public purse. Funding processes were generally seen as being bureaucratic and insufficiently flexible. Housing associations were seen as struggling to access funding from some sources because of the way in which their reserves were treated. It is clear that many within the sector feel that full cost recovery remains an issue that has not been adequately addressed. 6.3.50. Specific comments were made about wider role funding. A number of interviewees suggested that the amounts of wider role funding available were insufficient to match the ambitions of the sector, they felt they would not be able to pursue some specific projects due to the lack of funding available. Others suggested that the past administration of the wider role fund had been problematic for them;

57

inconsistencies of approach between different Communities Scotland offices had been frustrating to deal with. 6.3.51. The broader funding environment is seen as becoming colder in a number of ways. The withdrawal of ring fencing from Supporting People funding is seen as potentially concerning by some respondents. Others expressed the view that wider role funding was likely to be subsumed into the non-ring fenced resources allocated to local authorities at the end of the coming three year period and that this would result in funds moving elsewhere. Other interviewees raised the issue of the decreasing availability of European funding impacting on some of their most important wider role projects in the field of employability. Community planning

6.3.52. A section below will discuss in more detail housing associations’ views on community planning. It is clear however, that many interviewees were not optimistic about the sector’s prospects in an environment in which they will be required to engage more closely with Community Planning Partnerships to access match or continuation funding for wider role projects. Many interviewees see themselves as having limited access to the funds controlled by community planning partners, such as the Fairer Scotland Fund, and little prospect of changing the situation. In some cases, the local politics surrounding community planning, and engagement with local authorities more generally, were seen as a real barrier to accessing funding for wider role work. Capacity challenges

6.3.53. Interviewees highlighted a number of issues around the sector’s capacity to develop wider role work. Whilst acknowledging that the development of wider role is subject to the same time and resource constraints as any area of activity, the extent to which wider role activity development is a specialist and skilled activity was picked up consistently. In this context, there is concern from some that the loss of funding for wider role development posts may result in a real decline in the sector’s capacity to take action. Other interviewees remarked that capacity to develop wider role projects was very patchily distributed across the sector and that bodies such as the Chartered Institute of Housing did not provide sufficient opportunities for professional development in the fields of wider role and community regeneration. Policy change

6.3.54. A number of interviewees were concerned about the potential for recent policy changes to impact negatively on wider role. Firm Foundations, with its perceived emphasis on an efficiency agenda, has clearly caused some disquiet within the sector. It is being interpreted in some quarters as an attack on smaller associations. 6.3.55. Some interviewees viewed Firm Foundations more positively, seeing a real opportunity for wider role work to establish itself as a tool for delivering core housing goals more effectively. Generally, however concern was expressed that in a competitive environment, with pressure on every penny, wider role might be seen as something of a sideshow. Two interviewees summed up this range of concerns, one by questioning how the added value brought by wider role activity would be interpreted under Firm Foundations, the other by suggesting that reserves would in future have to be devoted exclusively to housing investment.

58

Regulatory system

6.3.56. Interviewees expressed a clear hope that the new regulatory system might provide a better environment for wider role. In the past, the perceived tension between the ambition of the regeneration arm of Communities Scotland and the caution and risk adverse nature of the regulatory arm was seen as creating uncertainty and a barrier to wider role work. The new system could provide an opportunity to deal explicitly with this tension and to give a clear steer to the sector that the Government sees real potential in its wider role activity and wishes to encourage it. Internal attitudinal barriers 6.3.57. Not all the barriers to increased/ sustained involvement in wider role were thought to be external to the housing association sector. Interviewees suggested that the whole of the sector was not committed to engagement in wider role. There are still associations who do not consider that it is their job to engage in broader community regeneration activity and who wish to stick to being a housing provider and doing that well. 6.3.58. Whilst it might not be appropriate to think of the issue as a barrier, other interviewees highlighted the challenges involved in getting their committees to take a broader view of their potential activities, in particular to back the use of tenants’ rents to fund such work. Committees were often reluctant to use tenants’ rents for projects of benefit to the broader community. One interviewee suggested that tenant committee members were often more receptive to wider role work, than professional committee members who often had fairly risk averse attitudes. Other interviewees reported similar issues concerning gaining the support of staff for wider role work. Views of regeneration stakeholders

6.3.59. Regeneration stakeholder interviewees recognised a number of significant barriers to housing associations doing more. They focused largely on internal issues within the sector, perceiving very different levels of activity from different associations that were, on the face of it, otherwise very similar. 6.3.60. Firstly, they recognised that housing associations were under pressure to concentrate on their ‘core’ business as developers and managers. Indeed, a number of stakeholders expressed strong preferences for them to do so. Secondly, time and other resources were recognised as constraints, particularly when housing associations had to face up to other challenges, such as those thrown up by Firm Foundations. Thirdly, some associations were viewed as highly conservative and risk averse, an attitude that some felt had been encouraged by Communities Scotland as the regulator. Fourthly, it was recognised that whilst larger associations had the capacity to do more because of their scale, small associations might not have the resources or the range of expertise that enabled them to engage with wider role.

Understanding the Sector’s Contribution through Wider Role 6.3.61. Housing association interviewees painted a picture of patchy awareness amongst other partners and communities of the contribution that housing associations make to community regeneration through wider role. Housing association scorecard respondents, with a mean score for the question of 2.8, clearly backed up this perception. 6.3.62. Some interviewees went as far as to describe the general state of awareness of other partners of wider role as actually being one of huge ignorance of the

59

contribution it can make to community regeneration. Councils were highlighted as often particularly lacking an understanding of what housing associations have to offer community regeneration, although some saw considerable variation between the authorities with whom they deal. 6.3.63. Other interviewees were more positive about the extent to which their own contributions through wider role were understood by others. Some felt that they were now in a position in which partners approached them to work on specific ideas based on previous experience of their effective delivery of projects. Even these interviewees suggested that the potential contribution of housing associations through wider role was better understood at a middle management rather than strategic level within partner organisations. 6.3.64. Wider role is not viewed as having a high profile amongst the general public and tenant population. However, interviewees suggested that tenants or the general public specifically understanding or using the term wider role was much less important than tenants and the public being aware that housing associations were organisations that were committed to going ‘beyond bricks and mortar’. 6.3.65. The responsibility for the patchy awareness highlighted above was not considered by interviewees to belong solely to other partners, although the insularity of many of those working in community regeneration, particularly within local authorities, was suggested as one cause. The housing association sector itself was described by a number of interviewees as being insufficiently proactive at communicating its successes to other partners, at ‘blowing its own trumpet’. Evidence from regeneration stakeholder interviewees 6.3.66. Further evidence of the wider understanding of the sector’s involvement in community regeneration was given by the responses of the regeneration stakeholder interviewees. Most did have a fairly strong sense of the extent to which housing associations are involved in the delivery of wider role activity in the communities that they serve. This was reflected in the response to the scorecard. 6.3.67. However, few stakeholders felt that the scale of activity was understood and recognised more widely. Many felt that housing associations and Communities Scotland could have done more to clearly define what Wider Role could do, or explain what was on offer and how it might fit into a partnership context. There was also recognition that there were significantly different experiences in different parts of the country and from different housing associations. Overcoming the Barriers to Delivering Wider Role Activity 6.3.68. Housing association interviewees suggested two key areas for action in overcoming the barriers discussed above: more active campaigning and communication by the SFHA with other partners; and capacity building within the sector. 6.3.69. Interviewees generally wanted the SFHA to do more to raise the profile of wider role work with other partners. They stressed that this must be based on making clear the unique selling points of the sector as a community regeneration partner; its relationship with tenants; its engagement with communities and hard to reach people; and its permanent place within communities in a context in which other agencies are seen as ‘here today, gone tomorrow.’

60

6.3.70. The SFHA is also seen by many interviewees as having a major role to play alongside others in the delivery of capacity building work with the sector. Some of the support required is seen as general capacity building, such as knowledge sharing on funding availability. 6.3.71. However, a consistent theme emerged across interviews, with people very keen that the sector should get better at demonstrating for both internal and external audiences the business and social impacts of wider role work and that they should become better at the process of ‘social auditing’, or meeting the ‘triple bottom line’. Interviews highlighted examples of work that had sought to develop this approach in relation to specific projects. 6.3.72. Responsibility for developing the evidence base to better capture wider impacts and benefits was seen as not only lying with SFHA, but also with the Scottish Government. In practical terms, interviewees were keen to see both the expansion of training on these issues and the development of a toolkit of use to practitioners. Regeneration stakeholder views

6.3.73. Regeneration stakeholder interviewees felt that housing associations could do more to pool resources or forge strategic alliances with one another or with other third sector organisations. In this way they might be able to access more resources and additional skills. Some felt that there needed to be support at the national level to facilitate bringing organisations together in this way. There was also a feeling that there was a lack of coherence in local and national policy. Unambiguous statements from national and local government that they wanted housing associations to do more wider role and to engage with other third sector organisations would help.

6.4. Promoting Social Enterprise Current Involvement in Promoting Social Enterprise Definitional issues

6.4.1. One issue arose immediately in discussing their current role in the promotion of social enterprise with housing associations. As discussed above in the literature review, there are definitional issues concerning the characteristics and membership of the social enterprise sector. These issues were apparent in a number of the interviews, with some interviewees seeing little distinction between their support for various wider role activities and their support for social enterprises. 6.4.2. It is also clear that many housing association interviewees feel that their organisation can be defined as a social enterprise and may often be the largest social enterprise within an area. Some interviewees worked for housing associations with group structures, where the housing association often enjoyed charitable status, whilst other companies in the group traded as social enterprises. These trading companies can provide a wide range of activities from employing some of the staff who work for the housing association to the delivering of services to residents and the development and management of workspaces. Level of activity

6.4.3. The most striking aspect of the discussions with interviewees around social enterprise support was that the sector’s activity in this area is clearly much less extensive than in that of wider role. One of the interviewees heavily involved in an impressive range of wider role activity described himself as only now making progress

61

in social enterprise, having previously been involved in a number of abortive attempts. 6.4.4. The lower level of activity evident in promoting social enterprise in comparison to wider role activity was reflected in the responses to the scorecards. The score for current engagement in promoting social enterprise was only 2.4, suggesting that a majority of respondents had little or no involvement in the field. The percentages of those involved in specific types of social enterprise support were also considerably lower than those involved in the delivery of community regeneration activity. Type of activity 6.4.5. There were a number of different ways in which associations were supporting social enterprises. Most commonly, interviewees were contracting with social enterprises, often in the delivery of environmental maintenance, and generally with social enterprises that have an employability focus. 6.4.6. Other associations had incubated social enterprises which were now functioning effectively. In some cases these associations had the ambition to help them become stand-alone organisations. In other cases they intended to keep them within the parent group and redistribute the surpluses for the benefit of the wider community. 6.4.7. A number of interviewees also said they gave support to existing external social enterprises. In one case this had involved stepping in to rescue a struggling social enterprise. In other cases support had been given to community café projects by developing premises or providing management advice. 6.4.8. Other interviewees had helped the early development of new social enterprises by channelling funding. For example, both Wider Role and Futurebuilders funding had been used by housing associations for feasibility studies into new social enterprises. One interviewee was seeking to position his organisation as the hub for social enterprise developments in his area. His association had developed community facilities for use as office accommodation and were hosting a project delivered in conjunction with a social enterprise support agency. 6.4.9. The chart below sets out the percentages of housing association scorecard respondents involved in providing different types of support for social enterprises.

62

Chart 7: Housing Associations’ Current Involvement in Promoting Social

Enterprise

Current Involvement in Promoting Social Enterprise

33%30% 28%

19%

26%

37%

30%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Managementand

governancesupport

Businesssupport

Staff support Providingbusinessservices

Securingpremises

Contracting FacilitatingNetworking

% of all respondents

Differences between national/ regional and community based/ stock transfer housing associations 6.4.10. There were substantial differences between the responses from national/ regional housing associations when compared to those from stock transfer/ community based associations. In five out of the seven categories of activity identified on the scorecard the national / regional associations reported lower current involvement than the stock transfer/ community based housing associations. 6.4.11. The gap was particularly large in relation to the provision of management and governance support. Only 19% of national/ regional associations currently provided such support, compared with 45% of stock transfer/ community based housing associations. A similar picture was revealed in relation to securing premises, with figures of 15% and 35% respectively. Interestingly 42% of national/ regional housing associations reported trading with social enterprises as a customer, as against 32% of stock transfer/ community based respondents. Views of regeneration stakeholders 6.4.12. Most regeneration stakeholders we interviewed reported that they had experienced little or no experience of housing associations engaging with social enterprises. Where they were able to quote examples, these were often of housing associations’ own trading subsidiaries, rather than of them doing business with other social enterprises. The exception was in the Highlands where the Chief Executive of Albyn Housing Association chairs the Highlands & Islands Social Enterprise Zone. On average, the regeneration stakeholders that responded to the scorecard felt that housing associations had a limited role in promoting social enterprise, giving a mean score of 2.7. 6.4.13. There was a real feeling amongst the regeneration stakeholders we interviewed that housing associations regarded themselves as different to, and set apart from, other parts of the third sector, even though it was often recognised that housing associations were social enterprises themselves. Furthermore, others in the third sector reciprocated those feelings and some respondents spoke of there being

63

mutual hostility and suspicion with the housing association sector, in part due to competition for funding. 6.4.14. The scorecard respondents were more positive. With the average score of 3.4, housing associations were considered to have some role or a considerable role in achieving that organisation’s social enterprise objectives and in promoting social enterprise more generally in future. The results were particularly high for social enterprises themselves. Reasons for Promoting Social Enterprise

6.4.15. The reasons expressed by housing associations for involvement in the promotion of social enterprise reflected their reasons for being involved in wider role activity generally. The social case for action predominated. Housing associations were primarily motivated by what one interviewee described as “the philanthropic goals of the movement”, coupled with an awareness of the specific skills that they possess. 6.4.16. Scorecard respondents also reflected the predominance of the social case for action, with an average score for the social case of 3.7 set against a score for the business case of 2.7. 6.4.17. Interviews with housing associations revealed some further insights into the motivation for them to get involved in the promotion of social enterprise. One interviewee highlighted her organisation’s sustainability policy as a key driver, with the use of social enterprises reflecting a commitment to use local goods and services wherever possible. 6.4.18. Another interviewee highlighted that their use of social enterprises reflected their desire to take a ‘broad’ view of best value in their contracting processes. However, the same interviewee suggested that his own experience had been of social enterprises delivering some services more effectively and with greater commitment than their commercial competitors. Responsibility for Promoting Social Enterprise

6.4.19. Arrangements within housing associations for promoting social enterprise strongly reflected the pattern of arrangements for engagement in wider role work. In many cases responsibility for the development of social enterprises lay with the same members of staff. In other cases specific additional capacity had been created within the organisation. 6.4.20. By contrast, where the relationship with a social enterprise was contractual, responsibilities and relationships primarily lay with the relevant commissioning department. Such trading with social enterprise had the effect of broadening the number of staff engaging with the social enterprise and inevitably increased the understanding of and engagement with that organisation. Future Involvement in Social Enterprise Views of housing associations

6.4.21. Housing association interviewees expressed a clear ambition to become more involved in the promotion of social enterprise. They felt that social enterprises could make a real difference to the communities in which they work by offering high quality services and providing employment opportunities for their tenants.

64

6.4.22. A number of potential areas for future work with social enterprises were highlighted by interviewees. The most frequently mentioned were waste management, environmental sustainability and maintenance. Some interviewees were engaged in the early stages of planning community facilities that social enterprises could use. 6.4.23. Housing association interviewees reflected that in the future they would not only incubate new social enterprises under their own umbrella, but would also help the development of new and existing external social enterprises. Some housing associations wanted the social enterprises they were developing internally to be floated off as independent organisations in due course, whilst others wanted them to remain within their group structures. 6.4.24. Interviewees that were currently contracting with social enterprises saw themselves continuing to do so in the future. Many of them felt that the real gains from engaging with social enterprises would flow from the development of long term relationships with them. 6.4.25. Many of those we interviewed felt that they ran housing associations that were themselves successful social enterprises and that they could share this knowledge with other social enterprises to help them to develop. The development of wider role activity was seen by many as a key example of their entrepreneurial ability. 6.4.26. One housing association interviewee saw an opportunity for more trading with other social enterprises by selling consultancy services - something he felt was possible without compromising the core ethics of the organisation. 6.4.27. Feedback from housing association scorecard respondents on future involvement in the promotion of social enterprises from was more mixed. The score of 2.7, in answer to the question on their willingness to become involved in the future, suggests that many associations see some extension of their involvement in promoting social enterprise in the future, whilst a substantial minority only see a limited expansion. 6.4.28. The chart below, however, suggests a slightly more positive outlook from the sector regarding future involvement. An increase was expected in all of the categories of activity, with the exception of facilitating networking. Increased activity was expected most in the provision of business services, (such as photocopying and book keeping) and in business support, (such as business planning and sourcing funding). Furthermore, 46% of respondents see themselves as contracting with social enterprises in the future.

65

Chart 8: Housing Associations’ Current and Future Involvement in Promoting

Social Enterprise

Current and Future Involvement in Promoting Social Enterprise

33%30% 28%

19%

26%

37%

30%

37%

44%39%

35% 37%

46%

30%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Managementand

governancesupport

Businesssupport

Staff support Providingbusinessservices

Securingpremises

Contracting FacilitatingNetworking

% o

f all respondents

% currently involved

% involved in the future

Differences between national/ regional and community based/ stock transfer housing associations

6.4.29. There was a smaller gap between national/ regional housing associations and stock transfer/ community based associations when looking at future activity. This would imply that national/regional association aspire to grow their social enterprise activity at a faster rate. Views of regeneration stakeholders 6.4.30. The regeneration stakeholder interviewees also felt that there was enormous potential for more joint working between housing associations and social enterprises. They recognised that associations shared broadly the same ethos as social enterprises and were often located in the areas, or dealt with the client groups that social enterprises sought to help. 6.4.31. Interviewees saw the range of assets and skills highlighted in discussions on wider role as being transferable to the promotion of social enterprise. The range of skills that housing associations could bring to the table included expertise in development, finance, human resources, property management, volunteering, governance, risk management and engaging the private sector. One interviewee felt that generating surpluses through social enterprise subsidiaries was one way in which housing associations could build their financial strength, enhance the skills of their staff and, by ensuring that they were exciting places to work, help them retain staff. 6.4.32. The responses by regeneration stakeholders to the scorecard survey perhaps reflected a greater understanding of the potential extent of social enterprise engagement than the interviews suggested. A little over a third reported activity in each category. However, they also recognised the very considerable potential for more joint working of between 60% and 72%, (see table below). It is very noticeable that regeneration stakeholders see much more potential for housing associations to engage in the promotion of social enterprise than the sector itself does.

66

6.4.33. Some regeneration stakeholders voiced caution, however. One felt that it was important that housing associations should not be singled out as the only supporter of social enterprise. All agencies had a role to play and, in terms of procurement, the big public sector agencies had far greater potential to open up their procurement processes to social enterprises. Another reiterated the frequently made point that housing associations must not be diverted from their core housing role. Chart 9: Regeneration Stakeholders’ Perception of Housing Associations’

Current and Future Involvement in Promoting Social Enterprise

Perception of Housing Associations' Engagement in Promoting Social Enterprise

41% 40%

30%

47%

39%35% 36%

71% 71%

60%

72% 73%71%

67%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Staff support,e.g.

Recruitment,management,training

Securingpremises

Providingbusiness

services, e.g.photocopying,book-keeping

Management andgovernance

support, e.g. findkey committeemembers

FacilitatingNetworking

Contracting, e.g.Trading partner /

customer

Businesssupport, e.g.

businessplanning,

sourcing funding

Activity Type

% o

f re

spondents

% Believing HAs are currently have a role

% Believing there is a future role for HAs

Barriers to Promoting Social Enterprise

Risks and time

6.4.34. Housing association interviewees identified similar barriers to promoting social enterprise as they did for wider role activity. In particular, they highlighted what they felt were inadequate levels of available funding and the reluctance of committee members to see “tenants’ money” devoted to this type of activity. 6.4.35. Others focused on the issue of risk and the length of time required to fully develop productive engagement with social enterprises. There was a feeling that social enterprises needed to be given more time in the early stages of their development to iron out problems and develop a track record than might be the case with other business models. Long term support was often needed until they were able to develop sustainable income streams. 6.4.36. Interviewees suggested that organisational inertia within housing associations may be a barrier to contracting with social enterprises. Switching suppliers can be time-consuming and, if they are moving to a new social enterprise that does not have a track record, it can be something of a leap of faith. There was inevitable pressure to use established suppliers.

67

Perceptions of role

6.4.37. It was suggested that many housing associations simply do not regard providing support for social enterprises as an important part of their role. Those associations that take a narrow view of their role tended to regard support for social enterprise as even further removed from their core housing functions than other forms of wider role activity. One interviewee went further, suggesting that housing associations were more comfortable dealing with small community or voluntary organisations than with larger social enterprises that might consider themselves to be of equal status. Policy Change 6.4.38. A number of interviewees also identified the current policy debate as a potential barrier to further engagement. A tension was identified between the drive for greater efficiency highlighted within Firm Foundations and what some interviewees saw as the need to take a ‘broader view of best value’ if social enterprises are to win contracts. Firm Foundations, by encouraging housing associations to exploit economies of scale in their procurement practices, may make it more difficult for small local social enterprises to compete. One association that was delivering supported housing services as a social enterprise was concerned that the increased emphasis on pure economic efficiency or cost in the commissioning of such services would count against his organisation. The regulator

6.4.39. Some interviewees referred to difficulties they had experienced with the regulator. Some had felt they needed to develop complex organisational structures to enable them to carry out some activities without compromising the charitable status of the housing association. This was also reflected in the interviews with some regeneration stakeholders, who felt that housing associations in general were risk averse and that they were encouraged to take this stance by the regulator. 6.4.40. Both housing association and regeneration stakeholders who responded to the scorecard clearly indicated that there were barriers to association engagement in the promotion of social enterprise. There were average scores of 2.7 and 2.9 respectively to this question, suggesting that respondents generally found some or significant barriers to engagement. Similarly, the score of 3.0 for housing association respondents, in relation to sustaining social enterprise support activity, suggested that associations typically experienced some barriers to doing so. Broader Awareness of Role of Housing Associations in Promoting Social Enterprise

6.4.41. Interviewees from both housing associations and regeneration stakeholders felt that the role of housing associations in supporting social enterprises often had a very low profile and was not widely understood by other partners. A number of housing associations felt that they had really had to push this agenda before others acknowledged the contribution they could make. By contrast, a number of regeneration stakeholders suggested that housing associations were not aware that their skills were in demand and that social enterprises therefore did not look to housing associations as a potential source of those skills. These contrasting views may reflect different situations in different parts of the country, or they may reflect a more general problem of communication.

68

6.4.42. One regeneration stakeholder we interviewed, however, felt that supporting social enterprises was not as straightforward as it first appeared. If housing associations wanted to engage in this work they would need to build capacity, it was not something they could switch on immediately. 6.4.43. Scorecard respondents reflected the view that there was poor awareness of the role of housing associations in promoting social enterprises amongst other partners. The score of 2.5 in response to this question suggesting that the majority view sits between those who see limited awareness from a few other partners and those who see some awareness from some partners. Once again, social enterprises themselves were most positive, with a mean score of 3.0. Overcoming the Barriers to working with Social Enterprise

6.4.44. The following suggestions were made for ways to overcome the barriers discussed above:

• More work is required on making relevant good practice examples and case studies more widely available, both within the sector and in promotional work with other partners;

• A sharper focus is required on supporting social enterprises to make the case for the added value they bring to service delivery. Simple assertions that such value exists is not sufficient to convince housing associations or others of the worth of engaging with social enterprises;

• Ways must be found to get housing associations to work more closely together in an environment where the emphasis is increasingly on promoting efficiency and exploiting economies of scale;

• The availability of soft loans, perhaps combined with some grant was suggested as a way of reducing risk;

• A national policy statement and local support for housing associations working with social enterprises could foster better relationships with the social economy.

6.5. Promoting Community Empowerment Current Engagement Extent and Range of Involvement 6.5.1. Both housing association interviewees and scorecard respondents indicated considerable current involvement in promoting community empowerment. 6.5.2. Housing association interviewees gave a clear flavour of their involvement in community empowerment over and above what might be termed their ‘standard’ tenant participation. This included work with tenant board members, tenant satisfaction surveys and support for tenants and residents associations. 6.5.3. Interviewees, particularly those working with community based housing associations, were generally keen to stress that community empowerment sat at the heart of what they consider themselves to be about as organisations. Those working with regional/ national associations were perhaps more modest in their assessment of the levels to which they are involved in community empowerment work. They were, however, generally able to give examples of a considerable amount of community empowerment work by their associations.

69

6.5.4. Scorecard respondents similarly indicated positive involvement in community empowerment activity, a score of 3.3 suggesting that most saw themselves as having some or significant involvement. The chart below shows that over 55% of respondents are involved in supporting the development of skills and confidence of activists and organisations; assisting communities to exercise power and influence; and promoting broad based participation in community affairs. Unsurprisingly perhaps, the lowest score is for engagement in assisting communities to provide or manage services, something which may be very resource intensive and require a considerable leap of faith from associations. Chart 10: Housing Associations’ Current Involvement in Promoting Community Empowerment

Current Involvement in Promoting Community Empowerment

46%

58% 56% 56%

37%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Working withcommunities toassess their needsand plan for change

Supporting thedevelopment ofskills and

confidence of

activists andorganisations

Promoting broadbased participationin community affairs

Assistingcommunities to

exercise power andinfluence

Assistingcommunities to

provide or manageservices

% of all respondents

Drivers for Involvement 6.5.5. For many interviewees the driver for their involvement in community empowerment activity has been their engagement in major regeneration or refurbishment projects. Consultations with affected communities have, of necessity, been at the heart of their work on such projects. The issues covered have tended to be much broader than narrow housing concerns, extending from local schools and community facilities, to health services and community safety. 6.5.6. Such consultations have involved associations in a huge range of different activities, for example:

• Community needs assessments and community surveys; • Community conferences; • Provision of ongoing development support to organisations or partnerships focused on community empowerment such as community development trusts;

• Funding for community newsletters. 6.5.7. One interviewee suggested that housing associations’ key role in working to empower communities was to assist them in turning their aspirations into realistic projects.

70

6.5.8. A number of interviewees reported that their associations employ officers with specific responsibilities to take forward the community empowerment agenda, sometimes funded through Wider Role funding. More generally, connections were made between wider role and community empowerment. This not only reflected communities taking a broad view of regeneration activity, but also reflected the need for community consultations as part of the delivery of quality wider role projects. Some interviewees, however, felt that they had thus far been less successful in making such links and were keen to do better in the future. Differences within the Housing Association Sector

6.5.9. National/regional associations had a much lower rate of community engagement (with a score of 2.8) than their community based/ stock transfer counterparts (3.7). This probably reflects both organisational culture and the fact that their stock tends to be more sparsely spread. Views of Regeneration Stakeholders 6.5.10. Responses from the regeneration stakeholder interviewees and scorecard respondents seemed to be contradictory. Amongst interviewees, most had very little experience of housing associations being involved in community engagement and empowerment beyond their role as a housing provider. Some noted support for local events, such as galas, whilst one felt empowerment was reliant on asset ownership. However, another felt that many outside the housing association movement were less impressed with the sector’s approach, believing that some Community Based Housing Associations had become dominated by small self-interested groups that had been in place for years and did not encourage the participation of others. 6.5.11. The responses to the scorecard were much more positive. Around one half of respondents were aware of current housing association work in assessing community needs, promoting participation and helping them manage services. Whilst around 40% were aware of work to assist communities exercise power and support for the skills and confidence of activists. Future Involvement in Community Empowerment Activity 6.5.12. Housing association interviewees generally saw themselves as continuing to develop their involvement in community empowerment activity. This was backed up by scorecard respondents who gave a mean score of 3.0 for this question, suggesting some ongoing expansion of involvement in the future. 6.5.13. For a number of interviewees involvement would continue to focus on their delivery of large scale regeneration projects. One interviewee stated that community empowerment work within his association would focus on the need to prepare for major forthcoming stock transfers from another association. Others simply felt they could do better in future, acknowledging that they have been “a bit light” in this area in the past. 6.5.14. Two qualifications in relation to future involvement were raised by interviewees. One highlighted that he straightforwardly did not believe in community control of delivering services, seeing it as unlikely to be effective in achieving results. Another suggested that the extent of his association’s involvement in community empowerment would itself depend on the wishes of the community.

71

6.5.15. The gap between national/ regional and stock transfer/ community based housing associations was also clearly seen in the views expressed about future engagement. A score of 2.5 for the former set against a score of 3.2 for the latter suggests that a substantial proportion of national/ regional associations see only limited expansion of their (often already limited) engagement in community empowerment. Chart 10: Housing Associations’ Current and Future Involvement in

Promoting Community Empowerment

Current and Future Involvement in Promoting Community Empowerment

46%

58% 56% 56%

37%

51%

65% 65% 65%

51%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Working with

communities toassess their needsand plan for change

Supporting the

development ofskills and

confidence of

activists andorganisations

Promoting broad

based participationin communityaffairs

Assisting

communities toexercise power and

influence

Assisting

communities toprovide or manage

services

% o

f all respondents

% currently involved

% involved in the future

Views of Regeneration Stakeholders 6.5.16. The regeneration stakeholder interviewees had very mixed views about whether they should develop a greater community engagement and empowerment role. A number of them thought that housing associations’ experience with property and development meant that they could have a role as community anchor organisations around asset transfers. Others thought that, where they were a majority landlord, they could play a role in channelling their tenant’s views to other agencies and one thought they should be “major players”. Another suggested they could help with needs assessments and capacity building. But most interviewees had no strong views on the issue. 6.5.17. The responses to the scorecards again contrasted strongly with the views expressed in the interviews. The proportion of those who believed housing associations had a future role in community engagement was between 72% and 84% in the five categories listed.

72

Chart 10: Regeneration Stakeholders’ Perceptions of Housing Associations’

Current and Future Involvement in Promoting Community Empowerment

Perception of Housing Associations' Engagement in Promoting Community Empowerment

56%

49% 47%

40% 38%

79%84%

77%81%

72%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Working withcommunities to assesstheir needs and plan for

change

Promoting broad basedparticipation incommunity affairs

Assisting communitiesto provide or manage

services

Assisting communitiesto exercise power and

influence

Supporting thedevelopment of skillsand confidence ofactivists andorganisations

Activity Type

% o

f re

spondents

% Believing HAs are currently have a role

% Believing there is a future role for HAs

Barriers to Engagement in Community Empowerment 6.5.18. Interviewees highlighted a number of barriers to effective engagement in community empowerment. These included local politics and relationships with other local agencies; attitudes within the housing association; divisions within communities; and operational challenges for regional/ national association with dispersed stock. Scorecard respondents similarly indicated that there were some barriers to effective engagement with an average score of 3.1 for housing associations and 2.9 for regeneration stakeholders. 6.5.19. Many of the challenges highlighted by interviewees could be interpreted as those inherent in any community empowerment work. It was suggested that some communities feel “consulted to death” and are experiencing genuine consultation fatigue. Devoting the required time and effort to sustaining community involvement in regeneration work, particularly over a time frame of many years, is seen as a hugely difficult challenge. 6.5.20. In other cases, communities were seen as reluctant to get involved in consultation exercises beyond the activists who sought to be involved in every activity happening locally. Some interviewees suggested that it was important to accept that communities have the right not to participate in consultation and a burning desire to get involved might reflect a high level of local dissatisfaction with the landlord and therefore be a sign of failure rather than success. 6.5.21. Local politics and relationships with other local agencies were seen as potential barriers to effective community empowerment. Attitudes within some local authorities were seen as slow to change, with reluctance from staff to relinquish a level of control and allow community feedback to truly influence the development of local services. One interviewee reported that his local community planning partnership had shown no interest in his association’s moves to set up a community conference, which the association had then had to drive forward entirely alone.

73

6.5.22. Some interviewees saw internal attitudinal barriers as inhibiting associations’ involvement in community empowerment in two ways. First, there was a tendency for some associations to see themselves as directly representing the community and therefore they saw no need for further engagement. Second, some were reluctant to devote rental income to consultation with a broader community not composed solely of tenants. 6.5.23. Interviewees highlighted that community empowerment could be complicated by divisions within communities. Some of these divisions were internal, reflecting the range of opinions and interests that you might find in any community. However, others were the result of external actions, for example the area-based nature of recent regeneration policy is seen as having created divisions within communities with some areas, or even streets, prioritised for funding while others were not. 6.5.24. Some of the interviewees based with national/ regional associations highlighted the inherent difficulties they face in promoting empowerment. Where their stock is concentrated in a small number of areas, then engagement is less of a challenge. However, where their stock is spread across a wide area or in neighbourhoods with mixed tenures and a number of landlords, opportunities for effective community empowerment work may be more limited. 6.5.25. Some of the regeneration partners that we interviewed acknowledged that local authorities who were pursuing a particular community engagement strategy might find that housing association proposals were not consistent with their approach. Some councils also took a particular view of how democratic accountability is established and might not be comfortable with representations being filtered through housing associations. Awareness of Housing Association Role in Community Empowerment 6.5.26. Housing Association interviewees suggested that communities themselves were very aware of the important role played by many housing associations in promoting community empowerment. 6.5.27. There was a general optimism that despite some of the issues raised above relating to local political tensions and a reluctance to engage with communities on the part of other agencies, there was a broadening appreciation of the potential contribution of the sector in this field. Overcoming these Barriers 6.5.28. Interviewees stressed three areas on which there should be focus in overcoming these barriers:

• More case study and good practice information supporting housing associations to better understand how to deliver effective community empowerment.

• More commitment from housing associations to accept that community empowerment extends beyond the involvement of community representatives on their boards.

• They should consider collaborating with other local agencies and third sector organisations.

74

6.6. Community Planning Current Involvement in Community Planning Extent of Involvement 6.6.1. Housing association interviewees presented a mixed picture of their current involvement in community planning processes. A number of interviewees have successfully become involved in sub-groups of community planning partnerships, often those focusing on issues of community safety. Others have become involved in the more local structures that sit beneath local authority-wide structures, or on estate regeneration partnerships which have close ties into community planning processes. Some have been represented in structures through formal groupings of local housing associations. Some have also participated in ad hoc events engaging a wider range of partners in community planning processes. 6.6.2. However, an equal number of interviewees described themselves as having very little involvement in community planning, one suggesting that they were still at the stage of trying to understand local structures. Others were involved in structures such as strategic housing forums that they felt should have been closely linked to community planning structures but, for locally specific reasons, were not. National / regional interviewees reported that their involvement in Community Planning varied considerably across different local authorities. 6.6.3. Housing association scorecard responses painted a picture of quite a limited level of current involvement in Community Planning Partnerships. An average score of 2.5 in response to this question suggesting that many associations see themselves as having only ‘limited’ or ‘some’ involvement in community planning. The average score in relation to this question from national/ regional associations of 2.3 set against 2.6 for stock transfer/ community based housing associations is further evidence that national/ regional associations face particular challenges to engaging in locally based activity. Regeneration Stakeholder Views 6.6.4. Most of the regeneration stakeholder interviewees thought that housing associations shared the general difficulties experienced by the third sector in engaging in community planning. Some of the respondents from CPPs themselves referred to useful contributions made by housing associations to theme or delivery sub groups, but did not see them currently as central players. A number of interviewees felt that Communities Scotland had sometimes been regarded as a proxy for housing associations on CPP boards. They suggested that this had not worked very well, becoming even less effective when Communities Scotland’s role shifted away from being a partner more towards being a regulator, following the introduction of Regeneration Outcome Agreements. 6.6.5. Regeneration stakeholder scorecard respondents, with an average score of 2.8, suggested that they believe that housing associations currently have some role in community planning, although a significant minority saw no such engagement. 6.6.6. There was widespread recognition that the policy agenda was putting more emphasis on strategic decisions being taken at the local level. However, most respondents were unclear about how things would develop in practice or how this would affect housing associations. One interviewee felt housing associations needed to band together and talk with a single voice. Another felt that they should be involved if they had major redevelopment proposals. A third felt their main contribution would be

75

increasing the housing supply. A fourth felt that they should “put more of their resources at the disposal of Community Planning Partnerships”. Future Involvement in Community Planning 6.6.7. Housing association interviewees consistently expressed a clear desire to become more involved in community planning. Some of them wanted representation for the sector on CPP boards and generally there was a desire for more involvement at a sub group level. Interviewees suggested that such an enhanced role might include contributing to discussions within partnerships, being a key delivery partner and bringing a variety of financial and other resources to the table. 6.6.8. Some interviewees had some reservations, however. One suggested that the availability of funding through community planning partnerships would be the major motivation for the engagement of his association. Interviewees from national / regional associations gave more mixed views and some clearly thought that a greater involvement was an unrealistic proposition for them. 6.6.9. Housing association scorecard responses suggested that they only expected a limited improvement in their involvement in CPPs in the future, with an average score of 2.5. Regeneration stakeholder were more optimistic, with an average score of 3.5 indicating that their opinions lay between associations having “some” or “a considerable” role in CPPs in future. 6.6.10. A number of strong opinions were expressed by regeneration stakeholders about future engagement by housing associations. Some respondents said that CPPs were not really interested in engaging with housing associations. In explanation of this, a number suggested that housing associations were simply not big enough players to get a seat at the table. By way of contrast, another respondent suggested that local authorities considered associations as rivals. Others felt that housing associations were unlikely to have the time to “sit through endless meetings”. There was a general recognition that there were considerable resource implications for housing associations operating in more than one CPP area, if they wanted to engage in all of them. Barriers to Involvement in Community Planning

6.6.11. There was considerable discussion from interviewees of the extent to which there are serious barriers to the further involvement of housing associations in community planning. Reflecting this, a score of 2.5 relating to the barriers to engagement suggests that many associations believe that such barriers are significant. 6.6.12. Most of these barriers are seen as associated with the method of operation and attitude of CPPs, in particular the extent to which they are dominated by local authorities. Interviewees did, however, suggest that there were some barriers internal to the housing association sector. 6.6.13. Many housing association interviewees were highly critical of the ways that many CPPs operate. The most critical respondent suggested community planning was ‘paternalistic, hierarchical nonsense’. Other critical comments suggested that CPPs generally lack a clear agenda for moving forward and have tended to take a problem-based rather than solution-based approach. One interviewee described community planning as a ‘sham’ and suggested that there had been very little to show for the all the money channelled through CPPs over recent years.

76

6.6.14. A further set of issues were raised about the extent to which CPPs are dominated by local authorities and focus mainly on their concerns and services. Many felt local authorities were reluctant to allow other agencies full involvement, disinclined to cede any power or control to others and tended to favour local authority services as the recipient of CPP resources. One interviewee also suggested that those involved in CPPs tend to be at or near ‘head of service’ level within local authorities and housing associations are generally engaged with local authority colleagues at a lower level. 6.6.15. Some interviewees presented a more optimistic picture. They believed that community planning partners had moved on from considering housing associations as small-scale players and had come to appreciate the breadth and scale of the contribution they could make. Interviewees felt that this success had only been achieved through hard work and the effective delivery of regeneration projects. 6.6.16. Local authorities were not seen as the only source of problems for housing associations engaging with CPPs. Many interviewees believed that Communities Scotland could have done more to represent their interests on CPPs, but had been too bound up with its more general oversight role. Communities Scotland had not used their role in CPPs to feed information back to the sector or to channel the sector’s views up into CPPs. There was also a sense amongst some that more general representation of the third sector through Councils for the Voluntary Sector on CPPs had not been of real benefit to them. 6.6.17. However, interviewees did acknowledge that there are inherent challenges in ensuring the effective representation of a disparate and sometimes divided (for example by suspicion between national/ regional and community based housing associations) sector on CPPs. 6.6.18. In considering the views of scorecard respondents, regeneration stakeholders were again more optimistic, with a score of 2.9 indicating they thought that there were some barriers to future engagement, whereas housing associations scored 2.6.

Overcoming the Barriers 6.6.19. Housing association interviewees highlighted two areas for action if the level of involvement of housing associations in community planning is to increase:

• CPPs should be more open to involvement of others and become less local authority dominated and focused.

• Housing associations themselves should be more open to working together and with other organisations to build relationships with Community Planning Partnerships. Direct involvement from every local housing association in a specific Community Planning Partnerships and its theme groups is not always realistic. Housing associations that wanted greater involvement needed to devote the time and resources necessary to build trust with other associations and establish representative structures that might enable more effective involvement.

77

6.7. The SFHA and Support for the Sector’s Further

Development General Comments about the SFHA’s Involvement

6.7.1. Housing association interviewees generally welcomed the SFHA’s interest in providing them with more support to increase the sector’s involvement in community regeneration. There is a perception that the sector needs to advocate more effectively for the added value it creates in this area and agreement that the SFHA has a role in such advocacy at a national level. 6.7.2. However, a number stated that they saw the SFHA as arriving late to supporting the sector’s community regeneration work. This suggests that the SFHA may have to work hard to convince its members that it has the knowledge and understanding required to act as a credible advocate for the sector in this field. 6.7.3. Other interviewees suggested that the SFHA should focus on tightly defined work at the national level for example; seeking to influence local authorities and other regeneration partners as a group, rather than seeking to micro manage what happens at a local level. They would not welcome the creation of an additional layer of bureaucracy by SFHA as part of this work. 6.7.4. One interviewee expressed a more critical view, that the SFHA sometimes makes too much of its own work, when it should be focussing on supporting and promoting the achievements and work of its members instead. 6.7.5. Another interviewee was sceptical about the general possibility of anyone being able to make a real impact on broadening the sector’s involvement in regeneration. They suggested that those associations that are already involved in regeneration would be continue to be involved, whilst those who were not would continue with their narrow focus. The same interviewee also suggested that it would be extremely difficult for the SFHA to positively influence local authorities to become more supportive of housing associations in this work. Exploring the Different Elements of In Biz 6.7.6. The NHF’s inBiz initiative contains four key elements, each of which was discussed with the interviewees:

• A clear national brand. • A dedicated website. • Dedicated publications. • A requirement for members to sign up to a public commitment to the In Biz brand.

Developing a Wider Role Brand 6.7.7. Housing association interviewees generally gave qualified support for the development of a wider role brand. 6.7.8. One reflected on the rebranding work undertaken by his organisation, which had focused on establishing the organisation as being ‘more than a housing association’. He felt that this had been helpful in making clear to tenants and partners the extent of its ambition. Other interviewees felt that a brand clearly establishing wider role and ‘place making’ as functions of associations over and above their basic social landlord role would be effective.

78

6.7.9. Housing association interviewees who supported the creation of a brand qualified this with the suggestion that it must:

• Not cut across local branding: interviewees envisage it appearing on the bottom of reports, publications and letter heads rather than being the lead brand on a document.

• Link back to the SFHA’s broader branding. • Be clear that small scale activity in these fields is as important as large scale activity.

6.7.10. Interviewees were also keen to stress the importance of wider ownership of the brand by the sector, who must be fully involved in its creation. Furthermore, it was suggested that a critical mass of associations would have to sign up to using the brand to make it effective. 6.7.11. Some interviewees thought that the brand should be like a ‘chartermark’. They felt it would have more credibility with partners and would encourage the adoption of best practice if associations had to meet a quality or competency standard before receiving approval to use it. Others saw this as potentially creating a further layer of unwelcome bureaucracy or a consultants’ gravy train. 6.7.12. There was general agreement, however, that a brand would be strengthened if it was part of a wider package of support or reflected genuine developments within the sector. 6.7.13. This slightly sceptical mood was reflected in the housing association respondents’ scorecard responses on the value of the creation of a brand. The average score of 2.7 suggests a split between those who felt that a brand would give some support to their work and those who felt it would be of little use. 6.7.14. There was less support for the creation of a wider role brand amongst regeneration stakeholder interviewees. Some felt that it would help visibility, but others were concerned that Wider Role activities were not sufficiently distinctive to make a brand meaningful. Some also expressed concern that it would act to set housing associations apart from other third sector organisations and that this would be counter productive. 6.7.15. Regeneration partner scorecard respondents were, however, more positive about the idea of a brand than regeneration partner interviewees, or their housing association scorecard respondents counterparts. A mean score of 3.4 suggesting that respondents generally felt that the creation of a specific brand for this work would be of some or significant value. Website 6.7.16. Most housing association interviewees were generally positive about the potential contribution of a dedicated website. Some suggested that it should contain best practice and case study information, information on funding opportunities and forums enabling people to communicate with one other. Other interviewees suggested that it would be better to develop a community regeneration portal that directed users to the relevant section of established housing association web sites. In either case, interviewees wanted to see a web site that was user friendly and kept up to date. Interviewees recognised that this could require significant resources and concern was expressed about where this might come from.

79

6.7.17. Some interviewees suggested that any website should be supplemented by electronic newsletters, along the lines of the SFHA’s Digest. A small number of interviewees did not support the proposal and suggested that a separate web site would confuse the sector. 6.7.18. A mean score of 3.0 from housing association scorecard respondents suggests that there is support for the idea of the development of a specific website within the sector. It was noticeable, however, that national/ regional associations were less likely to see the value of website than stock transfer/ community based associations, with an average score of 2.8 against 3.2. 6.7.19. There was support for a dedicated web site from some regeneration stakeholders’, but other respondents were ambivalent about the idea or hostile to it. Where interviewees were supportive, their main interest was in being able to access good practice examples. Again some felt this could be achieved by having a gateway that redirected users to the relevant section of existing housing association sites. Those making negative comments complained they did not have time to look at already existing web sites and were put off by those that were not kept up to date. 6.7.20. This mixed feedback contrasted with the more positive views of regeneration partner scorecard respondents. The mean score of 3.4 was higher than that from housing associations themselves suggesting that respondents generally felt that such a website would be of some or significant value. Dedicated Publications

6.7.21. Housing Association interviewees were considerably more dubious about the value of dedicated hard copy publications. Many expressed a clear preference for information in electronic format, suggesting that this was more immediate, more likely to be read and more cost effective given the expense of print and postage. One interviewee stated explicitly that he did not see the value in a hard copy best practice guide. Other interviewees were more positive about the need for hard copy publications, seeing value in clearly badged supplements or sections within existing publications. 6.7.22. The feedback from interviewees contrasted to that from scorecard respondents, who gave a mean score of 3.0 in response to the question about the value of dedicated publications. 6.7.23. There was also very little support from regeneration stakeholders for the production of hard copy publications. Generally the feeling was they would not be read, they were unlikely to be influential and they were expensive to produce. 6.7.24. The feedback from regeneration partner scorecard respondents was, again, more positive. A mean score of 3.4 suggests that they generally felt written publications would be of some or significant value. Public Commitment/ Declaration of Support

6.7.25. Housing association interviewees generally supported the idea of making a public declaration of support for community regeneration or signing up to an agreed national statement for engagement in community regeneration. They felt that it might have a positive impact on their involvement in these areas of work. 6.7.26. It was clearly suggested that any commitment would have to be substantive and go beyond woolly and worthy statements of good intent. A small number of

80

interviewees felt that the impact of making such a statement would be limited given the commitments that they had already made in this area, which they felt were already well-recognised by other stakeholders. Housing association scorecard respondents gave some support to the idea of a public commitment of support, with an average score of 3.1. Again support was greater from stock transfer/ community based housing associations with a mean score of 3.3, compared with National / Regional associations at 2.9. 6.7.27. Regeneration stakeholder interviewees generally liked the idea that housing associations sign up to a public declaration of intent to do more to ‘make places work’. People felt that this would help to create a focus within associations, clarify what wider role was to people outwith the movement and give external partners a sense of confidence that they would be well-received if they made an approach to a housing association. One partner drew the analogy with public agencies signing up to the Climate Change Declaration, which she felt had been a similarly positive step. 6.7.28. Regeneration partner scorecard respondents were similarly positive. The average score of 3.8 in relation to this question suggests that they feel that a public declaration of commitment to this area of work is capable of making a significant difference. What Other Support Might Be Useful?

6.7.29. Housing association interviewees were clear that a range of other support was essential to grow the involvement of the sector in community regeneration. Feedback centred on the need for more sharply focused training, more networking opportunities and the development of a clear research agenda. 6.7.30. Interviewees were clear that there is not enough relevant training for the sector. More specifically, it was suggested that what training is currently available was at a basic or introductory level. They expressed a demand for more advanced or detailed training, for example focused on specific financial models for supporting social enterprises, or specific ways of delivering particular types of wider role work. There is also a clear sense that the sector should have access to training, networking opportunities and information on the development of the broader policy agenda, involvement in community regeneration requires an understanding of policy developments going well beyond housing issues alone. Training must also seek to build the capacity and self confidence of the sector to take action. 6.7.31. Opportunities to network on the issues are considered to be an invaluable source of support and advice for associations. Conferences on wider role are seen as both essential networking opportunities and as effective mechanisms for communicating to other partners about the potential contribution the sector can make. It is also seen as important that opportunities to engage in face to face networking extend beyond senior management to other staff with responsibility for delivering some of these agendas. The SFHA is not necessarily the only body with a role to play in this area; Councils for the Voluntary Sector might also be useful partner. 6.7.32. Interviewees think there is a need for the development of a more coherent body of evidence highlighting what works in community regeneration. Frequently, they reflected earlier comments about the sector needing to be able to better justify the added value that it creates through its work. The development of such a body of evidence must in turn be backed by training and networking to share its results.

81

6.8. Key Findings from Research 6.8.1. Looking across the interviews and scorecards completed with housing associations and regeneration stakeholder some consistent themes were identified. 6.8.2. The Characteristics of Wider Role • Definition: There is a consistent view that the wider role of housing associations encompasses any activity that goes beyond housing associations’ traditional activities of developing, managing and maintaining houses.

• Range: It is not surprising that such a broad definition means that the wider role covers an extensive range of activities. Up to a dozen categories were named, including training and employment; welfare rights and money advice; energy advice; tenancy sustainment; adult literacy and numeracy; provision of community facilities; women’s refuges; environmental improvements and play parks; youth work; and advocacy.

• Delivery: There is also a broad range of wider role delivery models, including direct delivery, working in partnership, working through others and supporting projects led by others.

• Motivation: the social case for promoting wider role is the dominant motivating factor, with the business case coming some way behind.

• Staff: most associations deliver wider role though specialist staff that have a specific remit for wider role as part or all of their job description.

• Type of association: all types of association undertake wider role, but Community based housing associations are more likely to be involved, reflecting both their ethos and the geography of their stock.

6.8.3. Key strengths of housing associations for wider role:

• A good and trusted relationship with their tenants, who are often hard to reach; • A permanent presence, grounded in asset ownership and, in some cases, tenant management;

• Many have a strong physical presence, e.g. through their offices being located in deprived communities;

• Strong finances and governance, underpinned by a strong regulatory framework; • Strong professional and managerial skills, particularly in development and finance. 6.8.4. Social Enterprise • Many, but not all, housing associations regard themselves as social enterprises; • A number of associations have established social enterprises as separate companies within group structures, often to preserve their charitable status. Some intend to retain them, whilst others intend to float them off as independent organisations;

• A number of housing associations have supported the establishment of new independent social enterprises;

• Housing associations also trade with social enterprises, regional/ national associations are more likely to do so than community based / stock transfer housing associations;

• Housing associations are reasonably enthusiastic about doing more work with social enterprises – regeneration stakeholders are even more enthusiastic than they are. There is particular enthusiasm from the social enterprise sector itself.

6.8.5. Community Engagement and Empowerment

• Housing associations have engaged in a wide range of community engagement activities and intended to extend this activity in future;

82

• CBHAs are more likely to engage in community engagement than national / regional associations. Many CBHAs feel that community empowerment is synonymous with what they do – a view that some stakeholders questioned;

• Regeneration stakeholder interviewees expressed mixed views, with some indicating a preference for engaging more effectively in wider structures and with other organisations. However, those that responded to the scorecard were more enthusiastic about future involvement than housing associations themselves.

6.8.6. Community Planning • Housing associations are not considered “big players” in Community Planning Partnerships;

• The extent of their involvement varies across the country. Some housing associations have successfully engaged in area or theme sub-groups, but others feel excluded and disillusioned;

• Communities Scotland, rightly or wrongly, have been perceived as representative for housing associations on CPPs. The abolition of Communities Scotland leaves no-one currently advocating for the sector on partnerships;

• Housing associations would like to have a better engagement with CPPs in future. 6.8.7. Barriers Across this range of activities, common barriers were identified and solutions proposed: • There are strong preferences from housing associations and regeneration stakeholders that, although community regeneration work is important, their first priority should remain their core housing business;

• There is wide recognition that housing associations face significant resource constraints, particularly of time, in terms of delivering current work. More pressure may be placed on the sector in responding to new policy developments, in particular Firm Foundations;

• Regeneration stakeholders are often not clear what housing associations are doing terms of community regeneration, how it is funded and why they are doing it;

• The demand for Wider Role and other funding exceeds the supply; • Housing associations are considered by some regeneration stakeholders to be conservative and risk averse, in part reflecting the attitude of the regulator and those associations who just wanted to “stick with the knitting”;

• It is recognised that small associations do not have the resources to employ specialist staff independently to take forward community regeneration work;

• There is a perception that associations were insular and set themselves apart from other third sector organisations;

• There is a recognition that associations compete with one another and with other third sector organisations for resources and territory;

• Problems in engaging with CPPs are a common third sector experience. 6.8.8. The following suggestions were made about overcoming these barriers: • Associations should pool resources / form alliances with one another and with other organisations – to represent the sector, to lobby, to share resources, to do business;

• Policy makers should give a clearer statement on the value of the contribution of housing associations to community regeneration.

• Housing Associations need to more clearly and simply articulate what they do, what they offer to others and what others might expect of them

83

6.8.9. SFHA Support for Growing the Sector’s Involvement in Community

Regeneration The following points were made in considering how SFHA could better support the involvement of the sector in community regeneration: • Housing associations welcome SFHA support for and promotion of wider role; • There is some disappointment that SFHA had not given wider role a high enough priority in the past;

• There is a strong feeling that SFHAs future role should be to support, not lead, the promotion of wider role;

• There are mixed feelings about the proposal of a national brand for wider role. Favourable comments included the possibility of creating better visibility and making clear that housing associations were interested in more than housing by emphasising their “place-making” role. Other respondents, however, were concerned that this would cut across local branding and might appear cosmetic if there was nothing substantial behind it.

• There is a demand for best practice and case study information. Electronic format, primarily web-based information, is favoured over hard copy. A specific section within SFHA’s web site or a single gateway with links to relevant housing association web pages was suggested as well as a stand-alone site. In all cases respondents wanted to see well-resourced web sites with well-maintained content.

• There was widespread support from both housing associations and regeneration stakeholders for a public commitment or declaration. It was felt that this will clarify what housing associations are doing, set a direction of travel and help other stakeholders to understand what they might expect from them.

• There is an evident demand for focussed training, more networking opportunities and a clear research agenda.

84

7. Conclusions and Recommendations 7.1. Introduction 7.1.1. This research has suggested that there is a clear and important role for housing associations in the future of community regeneration in Scotland. Both housing associations and regeneration stakeholders welcome the sector’s involvement in community regeneration to date and want these activities to expand in the future. They recognise the ability of housing associations to target very disadvantaged client groups and make a significant impact on improving people’s lives. At a national level the Scottish Government has demonstrated its commitment by making provision for a dedicated Wider Role Fund to continue for the next three years and through the establishment of a specialist team to manage it. 7.1.2. There are some qualifications to this positive picture.

• Everyone – housing associations, stakeholder and government at all levels – continues to believe that the primary function of housing associations should continue to be the development, management and maintenance of housing.

• Whilst a high proportion of housing associations have engaged in community regeneration, some of this involvement has been small scale and a noticeable minority of housing associations do not think community regeneration will be a significant part of their future business.

• Housing associations make a significant contribution to community regeneration over and above the management and development of social housing, but, in resource terms at least, when this is set against the global levels of investment in regeneration in Scotland, it is relatively small scale.

• The review of Scottish housing policy and the current consultation paper, Firm Foundations, pose significant challenges for housing associations’ core functions. It is asking a lot of the sector to find additional time and energy to drive forward its engagement in community regeneration at the same time.

7.1.3. The recommendations below have been developed in the light of the evolving policy context and analysis of the extensive interviews and scorecard responses. They are divided into those which target housing associations and others at the local level and those targeted at the SFHA and others at the national level. 7.2. Local Level

Wider Role Becoming More Efficient and Effective

7.2.1. There is increasing pressure on housing associations to respond to the Scottish Government’s efficiency agenda and to make best use of the resources at their disposal, as Firm Foundations has illustrated. This will require associations both to use community regeneration work to support their own core business activities and to deliver such work more effectively. 7.2.2. There are, however, numerous examples of ‘self-help’ within the movement, where housing associations have come together to pool resources and share good practice and developmental capacity. In the case of wider role, there is a case for more partnership working with others, particularly in the third sector, but also with local authorities and other agencies.

85

Recommendation 1:

Housing associations should examine the scope for pooling resources amongst themselves or with other organisations, so that expertise might be shared more broadly and the most efficient use made of resources. There may be a role here for the SFHA, perhaps in conjunction with representative organisations from the third, social enterprise and local authority sectors, to broker such arrangements and to source skills outwith the housing association movement.

Recommendation 2: There are a number of forums across Scotland where housing associations are currently coming together to share information on Wider Role and other topics. These forums could play a key role in helping facilitate Recommendation 1, particularly if they sharply focus on sharing good practice, information and resources. Social Enterprise

7.2.3. Many housing associations consider themselves to be social enterprises and some have social enterprise subsidiaries of their own. Housing associations want to engage in more social enterprise activity; help other social enterprises to get established and flourish; and do more trade with social enterprises. 7.2.4. The environment for this seems favourable. The other social enterprises who responded to this study were even more enthusiastic than housing associations themselves about the prospect of joint working. The Scottish Government is encouraging the sector both by improving the environment for social enterprise and by providing direct funding, although housing associations are unlikely to be funded directly because they have exclusive access to wider role funding. In their concordat with the Scottish Government, local authorities have given a commitment to growing the turnover of social enterprise. Recommendation 3:

Housing associations that wish to expand their social enterprise work should use the opportunities provided by the concordat to proactively approach social enterprises, local authorities, Community Planning Partnerships (see Recommendation 5) and Local Social Economy Partnerships to explore opportunities for joint working.

Community Engagement and Empowerment 7.2.5. The relationship that housing associations enjoy with their tenants, many of whom belong to “hard to reach” groups, is recognised by many stakeholders as one of the sector’s key strengths. The sector generally regards engaging with communities on issues relating to their role as a landlord and developer as standard practice. 7.2.6. Some associations described the work they have been doing in supporting local assessments of community needs and opinions. The use of more systematic approaches to surveys and opinions, drawing on the professional skills within housing associations, could therefore be helpful in bringing more rigour to local debates about how scarce resources should be deployed and may act as a useful counter-balance to less fruitful oppositional forms of protest that dissatisfied elements in some communities resort to. 7.2.7. There was, however, less enthusiasm from other regeneration stakeholders for housing associations acting as advocates for communities and a concern that this could potentially cut across other representative or consultative processes, particularly in the context of Community Planning.

86

Recommendation 4:

Housing associations should carefully consider their particular circumstances when engaging in community engagement or empowerment beyond their role as a landlord. In particular they should ask themselves:

a. Whether they can legitimately assume a lead role? Such a role may be appropriate where they are the majority landlord or the main organisational presence in a rural area;

b. Whether they would be welcomed in this role by other agencies and organisations? If conflict is a probable outcome, they need to carefully consider whether this would be in the best interests of their organisation or the community concerned.

c. Whether they can draw on their professional expertise to help communities to take on new roles and responsibilities?

Community Planning

7.2.8. The Scottish Government is actively promoting the devolution of power to the local level. This is underpinned by the Concordat with local authorities and characterised by a reduction in ring fencing and the development of single outcome agreements with local authorities and Community Planning Partnerships. Communities Scotland has, rightly or wrongly, been viewed by many regeneration partners as a proxy for housing associations at the local level. The abolition of Communities Scotland removes this explicit link into CPPs and LSEPs. 7.2.9. Housing associations reported that they do not feel that they are as well-connected with CPPs and other local decision-making forums as they should be. Regeneration stakeholders tended to agree that this is the case and that other third sector organisations felt much the same. With the possible exception of those associations created by whole-stock transfers, it is clear that individual housing associations are not of a sufficient scale to command a place at the “top table” in most CPPs. It is also the case that housing associations’ engagement with CPPs will tend to focus on their core housing role and that wider community regeneration will be a secondary consideration. 7.2.10. Further account must be taken of the fact that housing associations are often competitive with one another and with other organisations for funding, territory and influence. It is clear, however, that the Scottish Government, both in Firm Foundations and in the Wider Role funding programme, is keen to encourage housing association to come together and work jointly. Recommendation 5:

Housing associations at the local authority level should make greater efforts to act jointly with one another to represent their sector within CPPs and on other relevant forums. They should also give consideration to whether local circumstances lend themselves to wider cooperation with other third sector organisations. Recommendation 6: Housing associations need to articulate (preferably collectively) a clear and simple offer to CPPs on the contribution they can make to formulating and delivering CPP priorities. The nature of that offer will be dictated by local circumstances and the particular priorities of each CPP.

87

7.3. National Level Recommendations

Making the Sector’s ‘Offer’ Clear

7.3.1. The housing association movement has a clear ‘offer’ to make to other stakeholders in contributing to community regeneration through wider role activity, the growth of social enterprise, community empowerment and community planning. That offer is grounded in its financial, organisational, human resource and relationship assets and the roles it can therefore play as a community anchor, creative contractor and trusted intermediary. 7.3.2. There is evidence from the policy literature that there is a growing understanding of this potential contribution within the Scottish Government. However, it is essential to address this lack of clarity on the part of regeneration stakeholders and to some extent within the housing association movement itself.

Recommendation 7: • The SFHA should work with the Scottish Government to ensure that all its policy documents in relation to community regeneration, social enterprise development, community empowerment and community planning clearly articulate the potential role of housing associations in delivering their objectives.

Recommendation 8: • In particular, the SFHA should work with the Scottish Government on the proposed further strategic review of the Wider Role Fund to ensure that the unique contribution that housing associations can make is fully recognised and supported.

Recommendation 9:

• SFHA should work with CoSLA and the Improvement Service to explore how this offer can be better promoted to local authorities and Community Planning Partnerships.

Recommendation 10:

• The SFHA should work through the Scottish Government, CoSLA, SCVO, social enterprise networks and their own members to disseminate a clear understanding of the role of housing associations as community anchors to a broader range of stakeholders.

Wider Role Fund Priorities 7.3.3. This study has highlighted considerable concerns within the housing association sector about its capacity to become more widely involved in community regeneration and in the reduction of resources available to support generic development work. Recommendation 11: • The SFHA should work with the Scottish Government to consider how housing associations might be best supported to increase the capacity and skills of their organisations and staff to more effectively and efficiently deliver community regeneration outcomes.

88

Demonstrating Added and Business Value

7.3.4. It can be difficult to demonstrate the added value of housing associations’ engagement in community regeneration. Whilst both housing associations and regeneration partners had a positive sense about there being added value, this sense was often based on anecdotal evidence. There is widespread interest in the development of more systematic and consistent monitoring and evaluation frameworks for community regeneration that would capture not only the narrow inputs and outputs of project work, but also the wider social, economic and environmental benefits. Recommendation 12: • The SFHA and the Scottish Government should support the development of ‘social accounting’ or ‘social return on investment’ models for measuring the performance and reporting on wider role, social enterprise and community empowerment projects. This should build on, or be consistent with, the Scottish Government’s exploration of such approaches for their work in promoting the third sector. The models developed should be usable across a wide range of activities and should be easy to implement by housing associations and their partners.

7.3.5. Housing associations are often restricted in their ability to devote increased resources to community regeneration by a concern that the activities undertaken are not financially justifiable for the organisation – a fear that there is little or no business return on them. The business case for engaging in community regeneration therefore needs to be made more specific. Recommendation 13: • The SFHA and the Scottish Government should support the further development of the models outlined above to ensure that they encompass effective mechanisms for auditing the business impact of such engagement, i.e. the impact on organisational effectiveness and on business performance on issues such as rent arrears and tenancy turnover.

An ‘In Business for Neighbourhoods’ for Scotland

7.3.6. One of the objectives in the brief for this research was to consider whether an initiative similar to the NHF’s In Business for Neighbourhoods should be promoted in Scotland. 7.3.7. There was a mixed response to this proposal. The advantages to such an approach were seen to be: • the articulation of a clear and consistent message; • a higher profile leading to greater recognition; • the dissemination of good practice to a wider audience; • promoting a more welcoming invitation to potential partners; • clear identification of those housing associations that wanted to promote wider role.

7.3.8. The main disadvantages were seen as: • a national brand might conflict with local branding; • a distinct wider role brand might conflict with the promotion of housing associations generally;

• there are already too many web sites and publications, often of poor quality; • a concern that such an exercise would be cosmetic and lacking in real substance.

89

7.3.9. The advantages of a national initiative to promote housing associations’ involvement in community regeneration seem to outweigh the disadvantages. However, it is clear that such a campaign would only succeed if it was properly resourced and if it enjoyed widespread involvement and support from housing associations. Given the range of opinions encountered, the issues of cost and support could only be properly tested in the light of specific proposals, rather than as an abstract proposition. 7.3.10. It was also clear that respondents felt a replication of InBiz would not encompass all the elements of support for enhanced involvement in community regeneration that would be welcomed by the housing association sector, such as opportunities for sharing good practice and training. Recommendation 14: • The SFHA should work closely with its members and national and local partner organisations to carry out a detailed examination of how training, networking opportunities and good practice advice relating to the sector’s role in community regeneration can be provided at a national and local level. Alongside this, the SFHA should identify appropriate campaigns to promote the diverse work of the housing association sector in developing and maintaining successful, sustainable neighbourhoods across Scotland.

90

Annex 1: Acknowledgements We would like to extend our thanks to everyone who helped us with this study. In addition to those who were kind enough to give their time for an in-depth interview, who are listed below, we would also like to thank the un-named scores of people who completed the on-line scorecards. Special thanks are also due to David Ogilvie (SFHA), Alistair Dickson (Scottish Government), David McNeill (Rocket Science), Paul White (CVS Scotland), Andy Milne and Derek Rankine (Scottish Urban Regeneration Forum). Interviewees Organisation

Shameen Akhtar Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations Peter Allan Dundee Community Planning Partnership Karen Cawte West Lothian Community Planning Partnership Martin Crombie Hillcrest Housing Association Foster Evans Employers in Voluntary Housing Ewan Fraser Dunedin Canmore Housing Association Lucy Fraser Albyn Housing Association Brain Gegan Cairn Housing Association Alan Grant Langstane Housing Association Angus Hardie Development Trust Association Scotland Chloe Hardy National Housing Federation Edward Harkins Scottish Urban Regeneration Forum Rod Hunter Scottish Housing Association Resource Exchange Caroline Johnston and Kristin Miller

CoSLA

Roddy MacDonald Third Sector Division, The Scottish Government Carron McDiarmid, Hilary Parkey and Bob McKinnon

Highland Wellbeing Alliance (Community Planning Partnership)

Adrian Moran The Housing Corporation Alistair McIntosh Housing & Regeneration Division,

The Scottish Government Alistair Mckinlay Communities Scotland Helen McNeil Glasgow Council for the Voluntary Sector Angela O’Brien Communities Scotland Aiden Pia Senscot Craig Sanderson and Peter Rae

Link Group

Morven Short Dunbritton Housing Association Frank Sweeney Cunninghame Housing Association Antonia Swinson Scottish Social Enterprise Coalition Robert Tamburrini North Glasgow Housing Association Bill Waller Partick Housing Association Phil White West Dunbartonshire Community Planning

Partnership

91

Annex 2: Copy of Scorecard Surveys

92

“Making Places Work”

A Review of Housing Associations’ Wider Role and Social Enterprise Activity in Scotland

Please answer the following questions.

Please indicate the size of your housing stock:

0-500 5-1,000 1-2,000

2,000-5,000 5,000-10,000

10,000 plus.

Please indicate the type of housing association that you are:

National generalist National specialist

Regional generalist

Regional specialist

Local authority stock transfer

Community Based/ Housing Co-op

93

Most of the remainder of the questions in this questionnaire use the Rocket Science scorecard format.

• Please indicate with a tick in the appropriate box which statement most closely describes your views. • You do not have to answer all the questions, you can leave a question blank if you are unsure about the

answer. • That said, we are not looking for you to take too long pondering over any given answer, your initial gut

response is good enough for the purposes of the research.

There are also a number of more open ended questions for you to expand on the answers that you have given in

relation to the scorecard.

1. Engagement in Wider Role Activity

TOPIC 1 2 3 4 5

Current Engagement in

Wider Role

My organisation has no current involvement in wider role activity.

My organisation has limited

involvement in wider role activity.

My organisation has some involvement in wider role activity.

My organisation has significant

involvement in wider role activity.

Wider role activity is a central part of the work that my organisation does.

Reasons for Current

Engagement- Social Case

My organisation’s involvement in wider role activity is not at all based on of our social commitment to the tenants and communities that we serve.

My organisation’s involvement in wider role activity is based to a limited extent on our social commitment to the tenants and communities that we serve.

My organisation’s involvement in wider role activity is based to some extent on our social commitment to the tenants and communities that we serve.

My organisation’s involvement in wider role activity is mainly based on our social commitment to the tenants and communities that we serve.

By far the most important reason for my organisation’s involvement in wider role activity is our social commitment to the tenants and communities that we serve.

94

Reasons for Current Engagement-

Business Case

My organisation’s involvement in wider role activity is not at all based on the potential for it to deliver financial and organisational benefits to us.

My organisation’s involvement in wider role activity is based to a limited extent on the potential for it to deliver financial and organisational benefits to us.

My organisation’s involvement in wider role activity is based to some extent on the potential for it to deliver financial and organisational benefits to us.

My organisation’s involvement in wider role activity is mainly based on the potential for it to deliver financial and organisational benefits to us.

By far the most important reason for my organisation’s involvement in wider role activity is the potential for it to deliver financial and organisational benefits to us.

Plans for Future Engagement

My organisation has no current plans to extend its engagement in wider role activity in the future.

My organisation has plans for a limited extension its engagement in wider role activity in the future.

My organisation has plans for some extension of its engagement in wider role activity in the future.

My organisation has plans for a significant extension of its engagement in wider role activity in the future.

My organisation has plans for a very significant extension of its engagement in wider role activity in the future.

Extent of Perceived

Barriers

I believe that there are very significant barriers to the further development of wider role activity by housing associations.

I believe that there are significant barriers to the further development of wider role activity by housing associations.

I believe that there are some barriers to the further development of wider role activity by housing associations.

I believe that there are a few barriers to the further development of wider role activity by housing associations.

I believe that there are no barriers to the further development of wider role activity by housing associations.

Sustainability My organisation finds it extremely difficult to sustain any of its wider role projects in the longer term.

My organisation finds it difficult to sustain most of its wider role projects in the longer term.

My organisation has some difficulty sustaining some of its wider role projects in the longer term.

My organisation is generally able to sustain its wider role activities in the longer term.

My organisation is nearly always able to sustain its wider role activities in the longer term.

95

Extent of Awareness

Housing associations’ potential contribution to community regeneration activity is not at all understood by community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to community regeneration activity is understood to a limited extent by a few community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to community regeneration activity is understood to some extent by community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to community regeneration activity is well understood by most community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to community regeneration activity is very well understood by nearly all community regeneration partners.

Please indicate which of the following statements describe your current involvement in wider role activity. You may indicate more than one category.

Initiating regeneration- Partnership Acting as a community anchor- providing a focal point for local communities, community organisations and services Planning regeneration, e.g. master planning, service planning, needs assessment Delivering regeneration, e.g. physical, social, environmental, facilities Providing funding Securing funding Acting as a trusted intermediary- linking tenants to services

96

Please indicate which of the following statements describe the roles that you believe that you will play in the

development of wider role activity in the future Initiating regeneration- Partnership Acting as a community anchor- providing a focal point for local communities, community organisations and services Planning regeneration, e.g. master planning, service planning, needs assessment Delivering regeneration, e.g. physical, social, environmental, facilities Providing funding Securing funding Acting as a trusted intermediary- linking tenants to services

Please make any further comments on your current engagement in wider role activity.

Please make any further comments on your potential future engagement in wider role activity.

97

Please make any further comments on what you think are the key barriers to your potential future engagement in wider role activity.

Please make any comments on how these barriers might be overcome.

98

2. Engagement in Promoting Social Enterprise Current Engagement-

My organisation has no current involvement in promoting social enterprise.

My organisation has limited involvement in promoting social enterprise.

My organisation has some involvement in promoting social enterprise.

My organisation has significant involvement in promoting social enterprise.

Promoting social enterprise is a central part of the work that my organisation does.

Reasons for Current

Engagement- Social Case

My organisation’s involvement in promoting social enterprise is not at all based on our social commitment to the tenants and communities that we serve.

My organisation’s involvement in promoting social enterprise is based to a limited extent on our social commitment to the tenants and communities that we serve.

My organisation’s involvement in promoting social enterprise is based to some extent on our social commitment to the tenants and communities that we serve.

My organisation’s involvement in promoting social enterprise is mainly based on our social commitment to the tenants and communities that we serve.

By far the most important reason for my organisation’s involvement in promoting social enterprise is our social commitment to the tenants and communities that we serve.

Reasons for Current Engagement-

Business Case

My organisation’s involvement in promoting social enterprise is not at all based on the potential for it to deliver financial and organisational benefits to us.

My organisation’s involvement in promoting social enterprise is based to a limited extent on the potential for it to deliver financial and organisational benefits to us.

My organisation’s involvement in promoting social enterprise is based to some extent on the potential for it to deliver financial and organisational benefits to us.

My organisation’s involvement in promoting social enterprise is mainly based on the potential for it to deliver financial and organisational benefits to us.

By far the most important reason for my organisation’s involvement in promoting social enterprise is the potential for it to deliver financial and organisational benefits to us.

99

Views on Future Engagement

My organisation has no current plans to extend its engagement in promoting social enterprise.

My organisation has plans for a limited extension its engagement in promoting social enterprise in the future.

My organisation has plans for some extension of its engagement in promoting social enterprise in the future.

My organisation has plans for a significant extension of its engagement in promoting social enterprise. in the future.

My organisation has plans for a very significant extension of its engagement in promoting social enterprise in the future.

Barriers to Future Engagement

I believe that there are very significant barriers to housing associations extending their engagement in promoting social enterprise.

I believe that there are significant barriers to the further promotion of social enterprise by housing associations.

I believe that there are some barriers to the further promotion of social enterprise by housing associations.

I believe that there are a few barriers to the further promotion of social enterprise by housing associations.

I believe that there are no barriers to the further promotion of social enterprise by housing associations.

Sustainability My organisation finds it extremely

difficult to sustain any of its social enterprise work in the longer term.

My organisation finds it difficult to sustain most of its social enterprise work in the longer term.

My organisation has some difficulty sustaining some of its social enterprise work in the longer term.

My organisation is generally able to sustain its social enterprise work in the longer term.

My organisation is nearly always able to sustain its social enterprise work in the longer term.

Extent of

Awareness

Housing associations’ potential contribution to promoting social enterprise is not at all understood by community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to promoting social enterprise is understood to a limited extent by a few community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to promoting social enterprise is understood to some extent by community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to promoting social enterprise is well understood by most community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to promoting social enterprise is very well understood by nearly all community regeneration partners.

100

Please indicate which of the following statements describe your current involvement in promoting social enterprise. You may indicate more than one category.

Management and governance support, e.g. find key committee members Business support, e.g. business planning, sourcing funding Staff support, e.g. Recruitment, management, training Providing business services, e.g. photocopying, book-keeping Securing premises Contracting, e.g. Trading partner / customer Facilitating Networking Please indicate which of the following describe the types of activity you might take forward to promote social

enterprise in the future. You may indicate more than one category. Management and governance support, e.g. find key committee members Business support, e.g. business planning, sourcing funding Staff support, e.g. Recruitment, management, training Providing business services, e.g. e.g. photocopying, book-keeping Securing premises Contracting, e.g. Trading partner / customer Facilitating Networking

101

Please make any further comments on your current engagement in promoting social enterprise.

Please make any further comments on your potential future engagement in promoting social enterprise.

Please make any further comments on the key barriers to your potential future engagement in promoting social

enterprise.

Please make any comments on how these barriers might be overcome.

102

3. Engagement in Promoting Community Empowerment Current

Engagement-

My organisation currently has no involvement in promoting community empowerment.

My organisation has limited involvement in promoting community empowerment.

My organisation has some involvement in promoting community empowerment.

My organisation has significant involvement in promoting community empowerment.

Promoting community empowerment is a central part of the work that my organisation does.

Views on Future Engagement

My organisation has no plans to extend its involvement in promoting community empowerment in the future.

My organisation has plans for a limited extension its engagement in involvement in promoting community empowerment in the future.

My organisation has plans for some extension of its engagement in involvement in promoting community empowerment in the future.

My organisation has plans for a significant extension of its engagement in involvement in promoting community empowerment in the future.

My organisation has plans for a very significant extension of its engagement in involvement in promoting community empowerment in the future.

Barriers to Future

Engagement

There are very significant barriers to extending the involvement of housing associations in promoting community empowerment in the future.

I believe that there are significant barriers to the further involvement of housing associations in promoting community empowerment.

I believe that there are some barriers to the further involvement of housing associations in promoting community empowerment.

I believe that there are a few barriers to the further involvement of housing associations in promoting community empowerment.

I believe that there are no barriers to the further involvement of housing associations in promoting community empowerment.

103

Please indicate which of the following statements describe your current involvement in promoting community empowerment. You may indicate more than one category. Working with communities to assess their needs and plan for change Supporting the development of skills and confidence of activists and organisations Promoting broad based participation in community affairs Assisting communities to exercise power and influence Assisting communities to provide or manage services Other Please indicate which of the following statements describe your potential future role in promoting community

empowerment. You may indicate more than one category. Working with communities to assess their needs and plan for change Supporting the development of skills and confidence of activists and organisations Promoting broad based participation in community affairs Assisting communities to exercise power and influence Assisting communities to provide or manage services Other

104

4. Engagement in Community Planning.

Current Engagement-

My organisation has no current involvement in community planning.

My organisation has limited

involvement in community planning.

My organisation has some involvement in community planning.

My organisation has significant involvement in community planning.

Involvement in community planning is a central part of the work that my organisation does.

Views on Future

Engagement

My organisation has no plans to extend its involvement in community planning.

My organisation has plans for a limited extension its involvement community planning in the future.

My organisation has plans for some extension of its involvement in community planning in the future.

My organisation has plans for a significant extension of its involvement in community planning in the future.

My organisation has plans for a very significant extension of its involvement in community planning in the future.

Barriers to Future Engagement

There are very significant barriers to extending the involvement of housing associations in community planning.

I believe that there are significant barriers to the further involvement of housing associations in community planning.

I believe that there are some barriers to the further involvement of housing associations in community planning.

I believe that there are a few barriers to the further involvement of housing associations in community planning.

I believe that there are no barriers to the further involvement of housing associations in community planning.

Please make any further comments on your current engagement in community planning.

105

Please make any further comments on your potential future engagement in community planning.

Please make any further comments the key barriers to your potential future engagement in community planning.

Please make any comments on how these barriers might be overcome.

106

5. Developing the Sector’s Further Engagement

National Brand- A national Scottish brand for wider role activity would not provide any support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A national Scottish brand for wider role activity would provide limited support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A national Scottish brand for wider role activity would provide some

support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A national Scottish brand for wider role activity would provide significant support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A national Scottish brand for wider role activity would provide very significant support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

Dedicated Website

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would not provide any support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would provide limited

support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would provide some support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would provide significant support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would provide very significant support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

107

Dedicated Publications

Regular dedicated publications highlighting news and case studies would not provide any support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would provide limited

support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would provide some support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would provide significant support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would provide very significant support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

Public Commitment of Support

An offer to make a public commitment of intent to support community regeneration, social enterprise, community empowerment and community planning would not provide any support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

An offer to make a public commitment of intent to support community regeneration, social enterprise, community empowerment and community planning would provide limited support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

An offer to make a public commitment of intent to support community regeneration, social enterprise, community empowerment and community planning would provide some support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

An offer to make a public commitment of intent to support community regeneration, social enterprise, community empowerment and community planning would provide significant support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

An offer to make a public commitment of intent to support community regeneration, social enterprise, community empowerment and community planning would provide very significant support for my organisation’s increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

108

Please make any further comments on the potential for any of the above measures to strengthen the involvement of

the housing association sector on the issues discussed on this scorecard.

Please add any further comments.

THANK YOU FOR COMPLETING THIS SCORECARD

109

“Making Places Work”

A Review of Housing Associations’ Wider Role and Social Enterprise Activity in Scotland

Please answer the following questions.

Please indicate which type of organisation you work for:

Scottish Government Community Planning Partnership

National Voluntary Organisation

Local Voluntary Organisation

Member of CVS Network

Social Enterprise Social Enterprise Infrastructure Organisation

110

Most of the remainder of the questions in this questionnaire use the Rocket Science scorecard format.

• Please indicate with a tick in the appropriate box which statement most closely describes your views. • You do not have to answer all the questions, you can leave a question blank if you are unsure about the

answer. • That said, we are not looking for you to take too long pondering over any given answer, your initial gut

response is good enough for the purposes of the research.

There are also a number of more open ended questions for you to expand on the answers that you have given in

relation to the scorecard.

1. Housing Associations and Community Regeneration

TOPIC 1 2 3 4 5

Current Housing

Association Engagement

No housing associations play a role in promoting community regeneration other than investment in and management of housing.

A few housing associations play a limited role in promoting community regeneration beyond investment in, and management of housing.

Some housing associations play some role in promoting community regeneration beyond investment in, and management of housing.

Most housing associations play a significant role in promoting community regeneration beyond investment in, and management of housing.

Nearly all housing associations play a very significant role in promoting community regeneration beyond investment in, and management of housing.

Joint Agenda My organisation sees housing associations as having no role in the achievement of its community regeneration objectives.

My organisation sees housing associations as having a limited role in the achievement of its community regeneration objectives.

My organisation sees housing associations as having some role in the achievement of its community regeneration objectives.

My organisation sees housing associations as having a significant role in the achievement of its community regeneration objectives.

My organisation sees housing associations as having a very significant role in the achievement of its community regeneration objectives.

111

Housing Associations’ Future

Engagement

No housing associations will have a role in promoting community regeneration in the future.

A few housing associations will have a limited role in promoting community regeneration in the future.

Some housing associations will have some role in promoting community regeneration in the future.

Most housing associations will have a significant role in promoting community regeneration in the future.

Nearly all housing associations will have a very significant role in promoting community regeneration in the future.

Barriers to Increased

Engagement

There are very significant barriers to the increased involvement of housing associations in promoting community regeneration.

There are significant barriers to the increased involvement of housing associations in promoting community regeneration.

There are some barriers to the increased involvement of housing associations in promoting community regeneration.

There are a few barriers to the increased involvement of housing associations in promoting community regeneration.

There are no barriers to the increased involvement of housing associations in promoting community regeneration.

Extent of Awareness

Housing associations’ potential contribution to community regeneration activity is not at all understood by community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to community regeneration activity is understood to a limited extent by a few community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to community regeneration activity is understood to some extent by community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to community regeneration activity is well

understood by most community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to community regeneration activity is very well understood by nearly all community regeneration partners.

112

Please indicate which of the following statements describe your perception of the roles currently played by housing

associations in promoting community regeneration. You may indicate more than one category.

Initiating regeneration- Partnership Community anchor- acting as a focus for the community / project Planning regeneration, e.g. master planning, service planning, needs assessment Delivering regeneration, e.g. physical, social, environmental, facilities Providing funding Securing funding Acting as a trusted intermediary- linking tenants to other services Please indicate which of the following statements describe the roles that you believe that housing associations might play in the promotion of community regeneration in the future.

Initiating regeneration- Partnership Community anchor- acting as a focus for the community / project Planning regeneration, e.g. master planning, service planning, needs assessment Delivering regeneration, e.g. physical, social, environmental, facilities Providing funding Securing funding Acting as a trusted intermediary- linking tenants to other services

113

114

Please make any further comments on your perception of the current engagement of housing associations in

promoting community regeneration.

Please make any further comments on your perception of the potential future engagement of housing associations in community regeneration.

Please make any further comments on barriers to increased future engagement of housing associations in community regeneration.

Please make any comments on how these barriers might be overcome.

115

2. Engagement in Promoting Social Enterprise Current Housing Association

Engagement

No housing associations currently play a role in promoting social enterprise.

A few housing associations play a limited role in promoting social enterprise.

Some housing associations play some role in promoting social enterprise.

Most housing associations play a significant role in promoting social enterprise.

Nearly all housing associations play a very significant role in promoting social enterprise.

Joint Agenda Housing associations have no importance in the achievement of my organisation’s social enterprise objectives.

My organisation sees housing associations as having a limited

role in the achievement of its social enterprise objectives.

My organisation sees housing associations as having some role in the achievement of its social enterprise objectives.

My organisation sees housing associations as having a significant role in the achievement of its social enterprise objectives.

My organisation sees housing associations as having a very significant role in the achievement of its social enterprise objectives.

Housing

Associations’ Future

Engagement

No housing associations will have a role in promoting social enterprise in the future.

A few housing associations will have a limited role in promoting social enterprise in the future.

Some housing associations will have some role in promoting social enterprise in the future.

Most housing associations will have a significant role in promoting social enterprise in the future.

Nearly all housing associations will have a very significant role in promoting social enterprise in the future.

Barriers to

Increased Engagement

There are very significant barriers to housing associations playing an increased role in the future in the promotion of social enterprise.

There are significant barriers to the increased involvement of housing associations in promoting social enterprise.

There are some barriers to the increased involvement of housing associations in promoting social enterprise.

There are a few barriers to the increased involvement of housing associations in promoting social enterprise.

There are no barriers to the increased involvement of housing associations in promoting social enterprise.

116

Extent of Awareness

Housing associations’ potential contribution to promoting social enterprise is not at all understood by community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to promoting social enterprise is understood to a limited extent by a few community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to promoting social enterprise is understood to some extent by community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to promoting social enterprise is well understood by most community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to promoting social enterprise is very well understood by nearly all community regeneration partners.

Please indicate which of the following statements describe the roles currently played by housing associations in

promoting social enterprise. You may indicate more than one category. Management and governance support, e.g. find key committee members Business support, e.g. business planning, sourcing funding Staff support, e.g. recruitment, management, training Providing business services, e.g. photocopying, book-keeping Securing premises Contracting, e.g. trading partner / customer Facilitating networking

117

Please indicate which of the following describe the types of activity that housing associations might play in the

promotion of social enterprise in the future. You may indicate more than one category. Management and governance support, e.g. find key committee members Business support, e.g. business planning, sourcing funding Staff support, e.g. recruitment, management, training Providing business services, e.g. e.g. photocopying, book-keeping Securing premises Contracting, e.g. trading partner / customer Facilitating networking

118

Please make any further comments on your perceptions of the current engagement of housing associations in promoting social enterprise.

Please make any further comments on your perceptions of the potential future engagement of housing associations in promoting social enterprise.

Please make any further comments on your perceptions of the potential future engagement of housing associations in promoting social enterprise.

Please make any comments on how these barriers might be overcome.

119

Engagement in Promoting Community Empowerment Current Housing

Association Engagement

No housing associations currently play a role in the promotion of community empowerment

A few housing associations play a limited role in the promotion of community empowerment

Some housing associations play some role in the promotion of community empowerment

Most housing associations play a significant role in the promotion of community empowerment

Nearly all housing associations play a very significant role in the promotion of community empowerment

Joint Agenda Housing associations have no importance in the achievement of my organisation’s community empowerment objectives.

My organisation sees housing associations as having a limited role in the achievement of its community empowerment objectives.

My organisation sees housing associations as having some role in the achievement of its community empowerment objectives.

My organisation sees housing associations as having a significant role in the achievement of its community empowerment objectives.

My organisation sees housing associations as having a very significant role in the achievement of its community empowerment objectives.

Housing

Associations’ Future Engagement

No housing associations will have a role in promoting community empowerment in the future.

A few housing associations will have a limited role in promoting community empowerment in the future.

Some housing associations will have some role in promoting community empowerment in the future.

Most housing associations will have a significant role in promoting community empowerment in the future.

Nearly all housing associations will have a very significant role in promoting community empowerment in the future.

120

Barriers to Future Engagement

There are very significant barriers to housing associations playing an increased role in the future in the promotion of community empowerment.

There are significant barriers to the increased involvement of housing associations in the promotion of community empowerment.

There are some barriers to the increased involvement of housing associations in the promotion of community empowerment.

There are a few barriers to the increased involvement of housing associations in the promotion of community empowerment.

There are no barriers to the increased involvement of housing associations in the promotion of community empowerment.

Extent of

Awareness

Housing associations’ potential contribution to promoting community empowerment is not at all understood by community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to promoting community empowerment is understood to a limited extent by a few community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to promoting community empowerment is understood to some extent by community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to promoting community empowerment is well understood by most community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to promoting community empowerment is very well understood by nearly all community regeneration partners.

121

Please indicate which of the following statements describe your current involvement in promoting community

empowerment. You may indicate more than one category. Working with communities to assess their needs and plan for change Supporting the development of skills and confidence of activists and organisations Promoting broad based participation in community affairs Assisting communities to exercise power and influence Assisting communities to provide or manage services Other Please indicate which of the following statements describe your potential future role in promoting community empowerment. You may indicate more than one category. Working with communities to assess their needs and plan for change Supporting the development of skills and confidence of activists and organisations Promoting broad based participation in community affairs Assisting communities to exercise power and influence Assisting communities to provide or manage services Other

122

Engagement in Community Planning.

Current Housing

Association Engagement

No housing associations currently play no role in community planning

A few housing associations currently play a limited role in community planning.

Some housing associations currently play some role in community planning.

Most housing associations currently play a significant role in community planning.

Nearly all housing associations currently play a very significant role in community planning.

Housing Associations’

Future Engagement

No housing associations will play a significant role in community planning in the future.

A few housing associations will have a limited role in community planning in the future.

Some housing associations will have some role in community planning in the future.

Most housing associations will have a significant role in community planning in the future.

Nearly all housing associations will have a very significant role in community planning in the future.

Barriers to Future Engagement

There are very significant barriers to housing associations playing an increased role in the future in community planning.

There are significant barriers to housing associations playing an increased role in the future in community planning.

There are some barriers to housing associations playing an increased role in the future in community planning.

There are a few barriers to housing associations playing an increased role in the future in community planning.

There are no barriers to housing associations playing an increased role in the future in community planning.

123

Extent of Awareness

Housing associations’ potential contribution to community planning is not at all understood by community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to community planning is understood to a limited extent by a few community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to community planning is understood to some extent by community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to community planning is well understood by most community regeneration partners.

Housing associations’ potential contribution to community planning is very well understood by nearly all community regeneration partners.

Please make any further comments on your current engagement in community planning.

Please make any further comments on your potential future engagement in community planning.

Please make any further comments on barriers to your potential future engagement in community planning.

Please make any comments on how these barriers might be overcome.

124

Developing the Sector’s Further Engagement

National Brand- A national Scottish brand for wider role activity would not provide any support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A national Scottish brand for wider role activity would provide limited support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A national Scottish brand for wider role activity would provide some support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A national Scottish brand for wider role activity would provide significant support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A national Scottish brand for wider role activity would provide very significant support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

Dedicated

Website

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would not provide any support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would provide limited support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would provide some support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would provide significant support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would very significant support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

125

Dedicated Publications

Regular dedicated publications highlighting news and case studies would not provide any support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would provide limited support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would provide some support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would provide significant support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

A dedicated national web site with news and case studies would provide very significant support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

Public Commitment of Support

An offer to make a public commitment of intent to support community regeneration, social enterprise, community empowerment and community planning would not provide any support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

An offer to make a public commitment of intent to support community regeneration, social enterprise, community empowerment and community planning would provide limited support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

An offer to make a public commitment of intent to support community regeneration, social enterprise, community empowerment and community planning would provide some support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

An offer to make a public commitment of intent to support community regeneration, social enterprise, community empowerment and community planning would provide significant support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

An offer to make a public commitment of intent to support community regeneration, social enterprise, community empowerment and community planning would provide very significant support for housing associations’ increasing involvement in the issues highlighted in this scorecard.

126

Please make any further comments on the potential for any of the above measures to strengthen the involvement of the housing association sector on the issues discussed on this scorecard.

Please add any further comments.

THANK YOU FOR COMPLETING THIS SCORECARD