Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs

7/30/2019 Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs

1/43

Strategic housing

servicesLondon Borough of Barking and Dagenham


2/43

The Audit Commission is an independent watchdog,

driv ing economy, efficiency and effectiveness in local

publ ic services to deliver better outcomes for everyone.

Our work across local government, health, housing,

community safety and f ire and rescue services means

that we have a unique perspective. We promote value for

money for taxpayers, audit ing the 200 bill ion spent by

11,000 local publ ic bodies.

As a force for improvement, we work in partnership

to assess local public services and make practical

recommendations for promoting a better quality of life

for local people.


3/43

Contents

Local authority housing inspections ...............................................................2Summary.............................................................................................................3Scoring the service............................................................................................5Recommendations .............................................................................................8Report ...............................................................................................................12

Context .......................................................................................................12Vision and strategic approach: how effectively do the Council and itspartners strategically plan work to balance the housing market anddevelop sustainable communities?.............................................................14Capacity to deliver: does the Council have the capacity to deliver itshousing vision effectively now and in the future? .......................................22Improving housing outcomes for the local community: is the strategicapproach to housing delivering better outcomes for the local community? 31

Appendix 1 Performance indicators.............................................................. 39Appendix 2 Reali ty checks undertaken ........................................................40

Audi t Commission Strategic housing services 1


4/43

Local authority housing inspections

The Audit Commission is an independent body responsible for ensuring that

public money is spent economically, efficiently and effectively and delivers

high quality local services for the public.

Within the Audit Commission, the Housing Inspectorate inspects and

monitors the performance of a number of bodies and services. These

include local authority housing departments, local authorities administering

Supporting People programmes, arms length management organisations

and housing associations. Our key lines of enquiry (KLOE) set out the main

issues which we consider when forming our judgements on the quality of

services. The KLOE can be found on the Audit Commissions website at

www.audit-commission.gov.uk/housing.

This inspection has been carried out by the Housing Inspectorate using

powers under section 10 of the Local Government Act 1999 and is in line

with the Audit Commissions strategic regulation principles. In broad terms,

these principles look to minimise the burden of regulation while maximising

its impact. To meet these principles this inspection:

is proportionate to risk and the performance of the Council;

judges the quality of the service for service users and the value for

money of the service; promotes further improvements in the service; and

has cost no more than is necessary to safeguard the public interest.

http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/housinghttp://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/housing


5/43

Summary

1 We have assessed the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham's

strategic housing service to be a fair, one-star service which has promising

prospects for improvement.

2 The Council's ambitions for housing are central to its wider vision for

regeneration of the borough and this is reflected well across its strategies

and plans. The Council has become only the fifth of 33 London authorities to

adopt its core strategy for future development, the housing elements of

which are informed by a sound understanding of the local housing market.

There is a strong focus on quality and sustainability in new housing

schemes and maximising the number of affordable homes built. i

Improvements to existing council housing take account of both the internal

and external environment in which residents live. To support housing's key

role in improving the lives of local people, the Council has re-directed some

resources for new and existing housing initiatives.

3 However, the Council has not always consulted its partners and the

community on all aspects of delivering its vision. There are some key gaps

in its strategic policy framework and in how well it shares data and makes

use of stock condition information on existing housing. Its approach to

meeting the diverse needs of the community and ensuring value for moneyin the service is underdeveloped. The Council has made limited progress in

enabling the number of new homes which are needed and in improving the

condition of Council and private sector housing in the borough. It provides

limited customer information on strategic housing services as a whole. The

adaptations and disabled facilities grants' service lacks customer focus.

4 A number of factors will support further improvement. Officers and

members champion the role of housing effectively. The Council's ability to

deliver its housing priorities has been enhanced by its housing plans which

are clearly aligned to current and emerging regional policy frameworks,

providing a strong framework for sustainable growth. Leadership of the

service has improved significantly over the last two years, supporting a clear

focus on ensuring the right capacity to deliver improvement. The Council is

self-aware, strives to overcome potential barriers and is open to new ways

of working to maintain the momentum for improvement. Over the next

20 years, projections for new housing and the land available for

development offer scope for the Council to significantly exceed its new build

targets.

i as a proportion of all new homes developed, on schemes where this is

viable



6/43

5 However, there are some barriers to improvement. The views of the

Council's partners are not always sought and understood and partnership

outcomes are not maximised. There are internal and external perceptions of

political resistance to considering some future options for improvement.

There are still significant gaps in the Council's performance management

framework and it has not yet finalised robust investment or riskmanagement plans. Some barriers to improvement are also outside the

Council's control. In particular, current uncertainty over future funding and

investment decisions mean it cannot be sure of the level of future resources

to deliver its aims. The national economic conditions are also hampering its

ability to attract development partners in an already challenging local

housing market.



7/43

Scoring the service

6 We have assessed the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham as

providing a fair, one-star strategic housing service that has promising

prospects for improvement. Our judgements are based on the evidence

obtained during the inspection and are outlined below.

Figure 1: Scoring chart i

Prospects for improvement?

Excellent

Promising Uncertain

Poor

A good

service?

Poor Fair

Good

Excellent

a fair service that has

promising prospects

for improvement

Source: Audit Commission

7 We found the service to be fair because it has a number of strengths,

including:

an ambitious vision for housing is at the forefront of regenerating the

borough and promoting sustainability. This is reflected well across key

strategies and plans;

a sound core strategy, informed by a strong understanding of the local

housing market, is informing the strategic approach;

community and environmental sustainability of new development is

supported by robust planning guidance and 'building for life'assessments;

affordable housing is maximisedii with a focus on social rented housing

for families, supporting a more effective balance in the housing market;

in some key areas, such as new build space standards and council

house improvements, the Council is focussing well on quality outcomes

for customers;

i the scoring chart displays performance in two dimensions. The horizontal

axis shows how good the service or function is now, on a scale ranging

from no stars for a service that is poor (at the left-hand end) to three stars

for an excellent service (right-hand end). The vertical axis shows theimprovement prospects of the service, also on a four-point scale.

ii as a proportion of the new housing developed on individual schemes,

where this is viable



8/43

new housing is well designed and sustainable; and

resources have been re-directed towards key housing priorities.

8 However, there are also a number of areas which require improvement.

These include:

some weaknesses in how effectively partners and the community are

consulted; gaps in the strategic policy framework and in the robustness and

effective use of stock condition information to help target resources

effectively;

an inconsistent approach to sharing intelligence and data with others;

limited clarity on how the needs of the borough's diverse community will

be met and weak arrangements to measure progress;

the Council's vision for private sector housing is not reflected in its

sustainable communities strategy;

limited progress in enabling the development of sufficient new homes to

meet local needs and in improving the quality of existing private sectorand council homes;

emerging progress in aspects of the private sector housing service are

balanced against significant areas which still need improvement;

a lack of customer focus, partnership working and effective

management of the adaptations and disabled facilities' grants services;

limited customer information on the services and assistance available;

and

an underdeveloped approach to value for money and maximising

resources.

9 The service has promising prospects for improvement because

strengths outweigh its weaknesses. These include:

housing is a key strategic priority for the Council, which it champions in

regional and sub-regional forums;

strategic housing proposals are closely aligned with regional priorities,

helping to maximise the potential for an increasing share of future

regional capital resources;

leadership of the service has improved significantly over the past two

years;

the Council has a strong focus on building the right capacity to deliverits housing priorities. Proposals for its future structure are seeking to

maximise this;

a pragmatic approach to developing new ways of working will help the

Council maximise the potential for improvements to be achieved;

momentum is maintained through an open approach to new ideas and

initiatives and a focus on identifying solutions and overcoming barriers;

self-awareness is strong. The Council clearly understands the

challenges it faces in future and the key strengths and weaknesses of

its current service;

the Council's local development framework and core strategy provide arobust strategic framework for sustainable growth; and



9/43

projections for new housing over the next five years exceed target

levels, with sufficient land identified to achieve the Council's targets over

the next 20 years.i

However, there are a number of barriers to improvement. These include:

some weaknesses in ensuring the views of all local partners and the

community are sought and understood and in maximising partnershipworking;

internal and external perceptions of some political resistance to

alternatives to Council led delivery of housing initiatives and housing

stock management;

significant gaps and weaknesses in the performance management

framework;

plans for improving the adaptations services which have not been

subject to consultation or challenge and lack improved customer focus;

future investment plans are not yet finalised and actions and alternative

options to mitigate known risks are not well developed; inconsistent arrangements for learning to help improve the service; and

uncertainty over investment decisions which are outside the Council's

control. In particular, the future council housing funding framework and

regional infrastructure funding which is critical for major regeneration

schemes to proceed. National economic conditions have also

exacerbated an already challenging local housing market.

i subject to regional investment in the infrastructure required to enable key

regeneration projects to proceed



10/43

Recommendations

10 To rise to the challenge of continuous improvement, organisations need

inspection reports that offer practical pointers for improvement. Our

recommendations identify the expected benefits for both local people and

the organisation. In addition, we identify the approximate costsi and indicate

the priority we place on each recommendation and key dates for delivering

these where they are considered appropriate. In this context, the inspection

team recommends that the Council shares the findings of this report with

residents and councillors; and takes action to address all weaknesses

identified in the report. The inspection team makes the following

recommendations.

Recommendation

R1 Strengthen the approach to developing and delivering the housing

vision and strategic priorities, by:

improving consultation to ensure the views of partners and the

community more effectively inform future priorities and proposals;

addressing weaknesses in sharing intelligence and data with

partners;

ensuring new and refreshed strategies and plans are more

robust, for example, by integrating outcome milestones, diversity,

value for money, risk and housing's contribution to quality of life

measures more clearly;

completing a comprehensive investment plan for the service,

which includes risk modelling as part of strategic plans; and

reviewing the sustainable communities' strategy to more clearly

reflect all aspects of the vision for sustainable housing within the

borough.

The expected benefit of this recommendation is:

a more robust strategic approach across the service which is fully

informed by the views of the Council's partners and residents and more

clearly demonstrates quality of life aspirations and outcomes for local

people.

The implementation of this recommendation will have high impact with low

costs. It should be implemented by March 2011.

i low cost is defined as less than 1 per cent of the annual service cost,

medium cost is between 1 and 5 per cent and high cost is over

5 per cent



11/43

Recommendation

R2 Improve outcomes for local people, including the most vulnerable, by:

improving the quality and accessibility of customer information to

ensure it is widely available and effectively targeted;

addressing the highlighted weaknesses in the private sectorhousing service to ensure a more proactive service is provided in

line with best practice;

revisiting the adaptations service review to ensure this addresses

the needs of vulnerable service users, from enquiry through to

completion of works, and reflects good practice within the housing

and health sectors; and

using service user feedback comprehensively, to inform

improvements.


easily accessible services which better support those most in need.


costs. This should be implemented by March 2011.

Recommendation

R3 Better ensure the service meets the diverse needs of the community

by:

increasing awareness of variations in the community profile indifferent parts of the service, such as in private sector rented

housing;

integrating better diversity information into strategies and plans to

show current successes, what gaps exist and how these will be

addressed to meet the varying needs of different community

groups;

addressing the gaps and weaknesses in equality impact

assessments to maximise their potential for supporting and

measuring improvements; and

incorporating diversity indicators into the performance

management framework.


greater clarity in the strategic approach to meeting the needs of the

community and better ability to measure and adapt services in response

to outcomes.


to medium costs. This should be implemented by March 2011.



12/43

Recommendation

R4 Improve the focus on value for money (VFM) within the service by:

developing a VFM and procurement framework for the strategic

housing service that supports, and is supported by, the corporate

approach;

prioritising a review of internal recharges to the service;

including efficiency targets in the service's performance

management framework;

routinely measuring the VFM-related impact of services and

initiatives;

benchmarking cost, performance and quality indicators to identify

areas for review and improvement; and

identifying internal and external resource opportunities (financial

and partners) within strategies and plans to ensure these are

maximised.


a more structured approach to improving value for money, with more

potential for an increased level of efficiency savings to re-invest in

service delivery.



Recommendation

R5 Strengthen management of performance by:

developing a refreshed performance management framework for

the service which addresses the weaknesses highlighted in this

report;

identifying key milestones, focusing on sustainability and quality

of life outcomes for the community and incorporating these into

the strategic planning framework;

ensuring that robust risk management arrangements are part ofthe framework,

developing a scrutiny programme to review key aspects of the

service and challenge risk management within strategic plans;

and

implementing a more systematic approach to learning from

service users and the service's own experience.


a stronger performance management framework which helps maximise

the scope for improvement.





13/43


14/43

Report

Context

The locality i

12 The London Borough of Barking and Dagenham is a small outer London

borough situated in the east of London. It is one of the most industrial parts

of the capital, being home to the large Ford Motors car plant in Dagenham

for over 80 years. However, large scale heavy industry has declined in the

area to be replaced by smaller service industries and manufacturing units.

13 The borough has a population of around 166,900 people, which isgrowing at a rate that is one of the fastest in England. It has above average

levels of both children and older people. At around 24.9 per cent, the

borough has fewer people from minority ethnic backgrounds than the

London averageii , although this is growing rapidly, as more people move

into the borough. This remains a sensitive local issue, with some groups

such as the British National Party, actively campaigning in the area.

14 The borough is the 11th most deprived area in England and 6th most

deprived of the 33 London boroughs. Of its 17 wards, 14 are among the

poorest in the country. ii i Educational attainment of adults in the borough is

comparatively low and though the level of test results and qualifications for

children at school are better, they are not strong.iv Unemployment is higher

than the London average, while average household incomes and wage

levels are among the lowest in the capital.v Despite relatively low house

prices and rentsvi , affordable housing is a key issue for many people

locally.

i data from 'Our Borough' and 'Key statistics' (January 2010) published bythe LBBD partnership, except where stated below

ii outer London: 29.31 per cent and London (region): 35.69 per cent

respectively. Figures relate to people classifying themselves as

'non-white' (not White: British; White: Irish or White:Other). Office for

national statistics, 2007-mid year estimates

ii i five wards are in the 10 per cent most deprived in the country, the other

nine in the 20 per cent most deprived.

iv the level of adults with no qualifications is almost double the London

average, while those with degree or equivalent qualifications are the

lowest in London. School examination and test results are just under the

national average.v c26,000 average income. Gross weekly wage of full time employees:

498.50 compared to 580.80 for London

vi typically around 25 per cent lower than London as a whole



15/43

15 A significant proportion of housing in the borough originates from

council built housing estates, many of which were built in the 1920s.

However, two-thirds of homes (68 per cent) are in the private sector, most of

which are owner occupied (58 per cent). The remaining properties are

mostly Council housing (28 per cent), with housing associations (RSLs)

managing relatively little stock (4 per cent). Since 2001, the number ofCouncil homes has declined rapidly as a result of the right to buy, while

private rented housing has almost doubled from 5.2 to 10 per cent of

housing in the area. i

The Council and the service

16 Barking and Dagenham Council is one of 33 London authorities. It

comprises 51 elected members, all Labour Councillors. The ruling party has

had a majority in the borough since 1964, but the single party composition

of councillors dates from the May 2010 local elections, when the Labour

party gained the 19 seats previously held by other groups. These included

12 seats previously held by the British National Party, which had until then

been the official opposition on the Council.

17 The London Borough of Barking and Dagenham is still a 'stock-holding'

housing authority. This means it has responsibility for both the 'landlord

service' to its 19,400 tenants and its statutory strategic housing role for the

borough as a whole.

18 The strategic housing service is part of the customer services

directorate of the Council. It reports to the housing portfolio holder, who is a

member of the cabinet, with a living and working board in place to provide

scrutiny of policy and performance.

19 Regeneration of large parts of the borough is planned or underway to

promote healthy living and economic renewal. This includes the south of the

borough, which is within the London Riverside area of the Thames Gateway

Regeneration Programme, one of the major development sites in the

capital. The Council's plans for regeneration include a considerable

increase in new housing over the next 25 years, in areas such as Barking

and Dagenham town centres and the Barking Riverside and Dagenham

South areas. However, the medium to long term viability of many parts ofthese plans is heavily dependant on infrastructure investment by regional

agencies, such as Transport for London, which is currently uncertain.

20 Land values in the borough are relatively low, but the cost of developing

new housing is similar to neighbouring boroughs. This makes it more

difficult to attract developers and other partners, as the financial viability of

development sites is often limited. This has become a more significant

challenge in the current economic climate.

i 2009 private sector stock condition report data compared to 2001 censusdata in the LBBD partnership key statistics. Most council house sales in

this period were prior to 2008, as sale levels fell sharply thereafter, due to

the recession



16/43

21 Between 2007 and 2010, the Council worked up plans for new housing

supply and improvement delivery arrangements for the borough, after being

selected by the government as one of only 14 authorities to pilot a 'local

housing company' initiative. However, this project and other pilots nationally

have not received the investment approval they need from the Homes and

Communities Agency (HCA)i to make them viable. In 2008, the Council was

also unsuccessful in bidding for additional resources through the private

finance initiative (pfi) to support estate renewal of several blocks of council

housing, where demolition and renewal is the most viable option.

22 This inspection focuses on key aspects of the Council's strategic

housing service: its roles in setting a strategic framework for housing in the

borough; in enabling new housing provision; and in making the best use of

existing private sector housing, including its approach to adaptations and

disabled facilities grants. We also inspected its strategic approach to

improving council owned homes. However, we did not look at its

homelessness and housing advice services or the effectiveness of itssupported housing provision in the borough.

Vision and strategic approach: how effectively do theCouncil and its partners strategically plan work tobalance the housing market and develop sustainablecommunities?

Is there an overarching and shared vision for housing which supports

wider ambitions for the community and is it championed effectively?

23 This is an area where the Council is performing adequately. It has an

ambitious vision for the regeneration of the borough, in which housing plays

a defining role. Housing has a strong internal profile and it is championed

well externally. Strategic plans are aligned to regional priorities,

demonstrating how they contribute to key objectives for London as a whole.

However, the Council is yet to ensure that its vision is shared by all key

partners and that it is well translated into a clear strategic framework. Some

key outcomes for local residents are not clearly articulated or integrated in

strategies and monitoring frameworks.

24 The Council's vision for housing shows clear ambition, with housing

seen as central to the achievement of the borough's wider objectives.

Housing and education form the two key components of the Council's

ambitions to regenerate the borough and improve the life prospects of the

community. They are cornerstones of the six prioritiesii within the borough

sustainable community strategy (SCS) and council corporate plan. They are

also well reflected in ambitious proposals to improve the health and wealth

of residents, such as the Council's key long term regeneration project to

i Homes and Communities Agency a national agency which provides

government funding for affordable housingii local strategic priorities in the SCS and corporate plan are safe, clean,

fair and respectful, prosperous and healthy and inspired and successful

young people.



17/43

transform Barking Riversidei from a derelict industrial site to the largest

housing development in the country. Housing is at the forefront of future

objectives.

25 The Council's focus on housing as a priority area is informed by a clear

understanding of the challenges it faces in balancing the housing market

and creating sustainable communities. This has led to a strong 'read across'between key strategies, policies and wider regeneration initiatives: all are

inter-dependant and support the same high level objectives. There is also a

strong recognition that the local context requires a sustained focus on

providing the right housing mix to improve choices for low income

households and support the borough's attraction to, and retention of, more

affluent people. This understanding has ensured that the LDF ii and core

strategy provide effective responses to these challenges, with plans for

affordable and market housing integrated into wider regeneration and

renewal ambitions.

26 Political support for improving housing outcomes is strong. Councillors

are considering a reduction in the number of strategic objectives, but

improving the quality and supply of housing remains a clear priority. The

housing portfolio holder and service steering groups ii i have maintained the

services' high profile and actively informed cabinet discussions. As a result

the cabinet has recently made some key decisions, including

re-prioritising its capital programme to support a higher level of housing

investment to pay for the redevelopment of large estates of council housing.

27 The Council is proactively championing the borough's role in meeting

regional housing needs. Its plans are aligned with current and future

proposals for the region, including an increased focus on the delivery of

socially rented, family sized homes. Key staff and members play an active

role in liaising with a range of agencies in London, such as the GLA, LDA

and LTGDCiv , and this has ensured support in developing its core strategy.

It is now developing a marketing strategy around this, to ensure a more

systematic approach and maximise opportunities for promoting its role. This

is crucial given increased regional competition for reducing resources.

Potential government changes in the investment roles of the London

Mayor's office could release extra resources but only where a borough's

proposals are seen to best match regional priorities.

i plans include the development of nearly 11,000 new homes combined

with new education, community and transport infrastructure, linked to

employment and environmental initiatives for Barking Riverside and

adjacent existing housing.

ii Local Development Framework: a collection of policies which outlines

how development will be managed in an area and which must be subject

to significant consultation by local people.

ii i development and private sector steering groups, where key councilmembers and officers discuss key policy issues

iv Greater London Authority, London Development Authority and London

Thames Gateway Development Corporation



18/43

28 The Council has taken positive steps to support delivery of its vision.

For example, it became one of 14 authorities in the country to be approved

to pilot a local housing company initiative. More recently it re-prioritised its

capital spending programme to provide resources to kick start estate

renewal in key council housing estates. The housing team in the borough is

relatively small so decisions like these require a significant commitment of

staff and financial resources. With few objections to new development, the

Council has not needed to make difficult decisions in light of local opposition

to development plans. However, it is clearly prepared to make tough

choices about resources to support housing as a priority.

29 The Council has not yet achieved a consensus of understanding and a

shared vision of how its housing aims can be delivered. The Council's key

development and regeneration partners widely support its overall objectives,

but they have not all been actively involved in shaping its related strategy

and policies. This is partly because until recently the Council has been

heavily focused on 'internal' proposals such as the local housing company(LHC) initiative. It has more to do to fully understand what current and

potential partners want and need. This is particularly important because the

borough will need to compete with neighbouring areas that may seem more

attractive locations to some investors. Effective dialogue will be crucial to

ensure long term buy in from partners and achieve better housing

outcomes.

30 Some key outcomes for local residents are not clearly articulated or

integrated in strategies and monitoring frameworks. For example, diversity

is recognised as important, but there is little clarity about what the range of

diverse housing needs are, how these will be met or how progress will be

measured. Additionally, the current SCS and local area agreement (LAA)

targets are limitedi , so do not reflect the importance of private sector

housing to both housing supply and quality outcomes, an issue now

recognised by the Council. The contribution housing makes to community

sustainability and to the quality of life of residents is also underdeveloped in

strategic goals and monitoring frameworks. These gaps make it hard for the

Council to be sure that housing outcomes are being maximised.

How effectively is partnership work ing and community consultationshaping and supporting delivery of the strategic approach to housing?

31 The Council is performing adequately in this area. It is working well with

key strategic partners to align its plans with regional policy and has

undertaken wide community consultation on its planning frameworks and

major development schemes. However, its consultation arrangements, with

both the community and other partners, are not consistently strong, leading

to variations in outcomes.

i focusing only on new housing (total and affordable) and decency levels in

council homes



19/43

32 The Council is actively involved in a number of regional and

sub-regional forums and partnerships to inform and lobby policy makers to

support its strategic objectives. It works well alongside the key GLA 'family'

of agencies. Liaison with the Mayor of London's office has resulted in a

reduction in the borough's proposed London housing plan targets to a level

the Council considers more realistic. Close working with the health servicehas enabled new health facilities to be recognised within the LDF and

incorporated into plans for schemes such as Barking Riverside. The Council

has also worked with Transport for London to ensure, where possible,

critical infrastructure requirementsi are delivered. Joint working has also

enabled it to access additional sub-regional resources, such as extra private

sector grant fundingii , and to take the lead on new initiatives, such as the

low carbon zone in Barking town centre. ii i This is helping to support the

Council's housing objectives.

33 Wide community consultation was undertaken in developing the corestrategy. Various written, verbal and electronic consultation methods have

been used to seek community views and the Council has dedicated

community communicators in place to help ensure the range of methods

reflects the diverse community. This includes different ways to attract the

views of minority groups and use of support agencies, faith groups and

networks in the borough to help maximise the opportunities for people to get

involved. The Council has faced little opposition to its proposals, with the

borough becoming only the fifth of 33 authorities in London to have adopted

its core strategy.

34 Effective arrangements are also in place to plan consultation on major

schemes. The Council invites members of the Council's residents' urban

design forumiv to review and assess planning design in major schemes

such as Barking Riverside, with feedback given to architects and planners.

There is also a pre-application process for major schemes which allows land

owners and their agents to informally discuss their proposals and plans with

council officers before formal applications are made. These arrangements

help support the planning process. There has so far been no major

opposition to any submitted planning applications.

35 Consultation on the strategic direction of some service areas isunderdeveloped. For example, the Council has only just re-started a private

i a number of decisions on infrastructure investment, which hold the key to

whether new housing can be delivered on the major schemes at Barking

Riverside and Dagenham South from 2015 onwards, are currently on

hold.

ii 140,000 to help reduce the level of category 1 health and safety rating

system hazards

ii i an initiative to reduce carbon emissions by 20.12 per cent by 2020

through support and assistance to residents, businesses, community

groups and schools and for residents, to help reduce fuel poverty (thoughno targets for this are defined)

iv six members of the Council's citizens panel, who have received training

in design issues, who meet every two months



20/43

sector housing landlords (PSH) forum and little innovation has been used to

consult partners, landlords or residents on its draft PSH strategy, with those

landlords we contacted unaware of the process. No consultation has taken

place about the adaptations service, either internallyi or with the home

improvement agencyii (HIA) and residents. This is despite the Council now

considering an options paper on future service delivery. In addition, while

council tenants have significant influence on the details of individual scheme

improvements where they live, they have so far had little involvement in the

significant changes made to the strategic approach to asset management or

development of the new draft strategy related to this. In some key areas,

partners and residents have not had effective opportunity to influence the

strategic direction and delivery of the service.

36 The Council has not yet made the most of what RSL partners could

offer. It has worked well with some individual RSLs on specific schemes, but

only where these are on private land. Strategically it has lacked effective

engagement to make sure it knows what these key partners want or needon a more collective basis. Input has been limited by the lack of effective

housing partner forumsii i to influence housing matters. The Council is not

ensuring it has a full range of views to inform its decisions and to make the

most of resources which may be available.

37 Inconsistent levels of partnership working have led to varying service

outcomes. For example, the Council has worked very closely with its

framework contractors to re-model improvement programmes in light of

resources being less than anticipated. This has maintained relationships

which could have become strained as the contractors' expected income wasreduced. However, the Council's adult and community services and housing

sections have not worked well together on adaptation services and there

has been no consultation with the HIA. This has resulted in a lack of shared

responsibility at the Council and missed opportunities to maximise funding

and improve the service for customers. The Council cannot demonstrate

partnership arrangements are always maximised.

Is there an up-to-date understanding of the housing market and

housing conditions, socio-economic data and the broader policy

context which informs the housing vision and strategic decisionmaking?

38 The Council is performing below minimum requirements in this area. It

works well in some ways with partners and stakeholders to share

intelligence, but in other areas its approach is weak. Its understanding and

i adaptations and disabled facilities grants are managed by the adult and

community services section of the Council on behalf of the housing

service

ii a local agency which provides help and support to residents making

applications for disabled facilities grantsii i for example, a previous RSL forum, which has not met for ten months

was ineffective and the Council has instead relied on discussions with

individual RSLs to communicate its plans



21/43

use of stock condition information is limited and information on the diverse

needs of local people is not well identified within its strategic plans and

targets. However, it does have a good understanding of the local housing

market and has undertaken a robust assessment of future land availability.

39 The effectiveness of the Council in sharing and challenging data is

mixed. It has worked with local strategic partners to share their intelligencearound future infrastructure needs for its development proposals around

education, health and transport, for example. However, data is not shared

with members in a meaningful way and limited comparison and sub-regional

data is shared with other Councils. The current status of the Council's

strategies and the absence of effective partner forums for the service mean

there is also little scope for wider data to be shared and its assumptions to

be challenged. This means the Council is not maximising the level and

robustness of the data available to enhance its strategic approach.

40 The robustness and use of stock condition information is

underdeveloped. Stock condition data for the Council's own stock is

outdated and a new survey is now underway. A report last yeari identified

problems with the reliability of the survey undertaken in 2005, concluding

that it was impossible to accurately forecast investment requirements. The

new survey could therefore make markedly different projections of the levels

of current and future component failureii and investment required. In

relation to the private sector stock, the Council's first stock condition survey

was completed in September 2009. This has given the Council a good

understanding of housing conditions in the sector and future needs for

investment. It plans to integrate details from both surveys in the respectivestrategiesii i as these are finalised. However, it currently lacks any asset

management tools to manipulate and model the findings, while data from

other initiatives, such as energy efficiency schemes, is collected but not

analysed on a strategic basis. So far the Council has not had up-to-date

information or a sophisticated approach to identifying and targeting its

resources.

41 Socio-economic data is not effectively translated to inform the Council's

strategic objectives. The Council has a good high level understanding of the

demographic and economic make up of the community, but this has not led

to targets or strategic milestones being put in place or measured.iv More

specific data on the individual needs of different community groups and

diversity strands are not well developed and little outcome information is

captured to ensure progress can be measured and policies amended. The

i stock condition data report (undated)

ii initial soundings from surveys so far suggest current data is not

extensively different from actual conditions, but changes in expected

standards and renewal rather than repair will significantly increase

required investment

ii i asset management and private sector housing strategies, which arecurrently being developed

iv the annual monitoring report includes some targets, but these are not

routinely monitored or revisited through the year



22/43

Council is not robust in ensuring its policies and plans meet the needs of

everyone in the community.

42 The Council has a good understanding of the local housing market. In

comparison with neighbouring boroughs, land costs are lower but

development costs similar. This has been exacerbated by the national

economic situation and often makes new housing difficult to justify infinancial terms. The Council commissioned a joint strategic housing market

assessment with other east London authorities and received the draft report

this summer. The reports findings build upon the outcomes from the

Councils own 2005 housing needs study and have influenced its current

thinking. A new housing needs survey is being undertaken this Autumn and

the results will feed into a new Housing Strategy, planned for publication in

early 2011. In the meantime the Council has a good awareness of changing

prices and shifts in social housing demand. A good understanding of local

housing market conditions is important in making sure strategies and plans

address identified housing needs.

43 The Council has a clear understanding of future land availability for new

housing in the borough. A strategic assessment has been undertaken which

identified sufficient land to provide the housing required under the London

housing plan targets and its core strategy until 2023/24. This has enabled it

to seek developer interest in sites such as Fresh Wharf, where planning

permission has been granted, and Abbey Retail Park, where a planning

application is anticipated. These sorts of sites will provide some of the more

significant levels of developmenti in the borough until infrastructure funding

gaps at larger regeneration schemes have been resolved.

Are there robust housing and planning strategies and policies which

support the delivery of housing priorities?

44 This is an area where the Council's performance is adequate. Its overall

housing plans and individual scheme proposals clearly identify how they

meet both the borough's and wider regional aims. The core strategy is

robust and community sustainability is supported by a range of planning

advice, which also helps to balance the type of housing provided in new

schemes against local needs. However, the strategic framework for

delivering outcomes across the service is currently underdeveloped and the

Council's approach to equality impact assessments is not yet robust.

45 The Council's overall strategic approach to future development is

effectively aligned with sub-regional and regional policy frameworks and

opportunities. Its alignment with regional policy has been reflected in the

core strategy and local development framework (LDF). At the same time,

individual scheme plans systematically draw out common themes both in

relation to housing and wider regeneration delivery. For example,

regeneration plans for Dagenham South and Barking Riverside highlight the

potential for providing large, sustainable, family housing along with neweducational and community facilities, while plans for Barking town centre

i the planned number of homes at Fresh Wharf and Abbey Retail Park

over the next five years, is 300 and 500 respectively



23/43

link housing development to the regeneration of the retail centre and

associated infrastructure. This aims to maximise support for the borough's

proposals and attract greater investment to support its plans.

46 Development of new homes is supported by a robust core strategy

which, after public examination, has now been adopted. The strategy

received support from the key London agencies and was non-controversiallocally as plans mainly relate to development sites which are remote from

existing housing, have been planned for many years and will enhance

community and open space facilities. They include the provision of schools,

health and other community facilities, while other LDF documents include

the Councils policies on space standards, sustainable construction and

design. All newly built homes have to meet lifetime homes and sustainability

standards. Planning policies provide a strategy for sustainable growth,

subject to the provision of the required social infrastructure.

47 Sustainability of new housing developments is supported by a range of

planning advice notes. Guidance is provided on sustainable construction,

waste and recycling and crime prevention. The Council's detailed advice

note on 'green roofs' won a commendation from the Royal Town Planning

Institute and has led to this feature being incorporated into designs for a

number of public buildings in the Barking Riverside scheme. The borough

also has two qualified 'building for life' assessors who have undertaken

assessments on all major schemes since 2008, linked to its commitment to

ensuring better life opportunities through regeneration. The Council is

incorporating environmental and community sustainability as a strong

feature of scheme design through clear planning criteria.

48 Planning guidance also supports the Council's priority to ensure the

right balance between market and affordable housing. Its targets to

maximise affordable housing provision and the split between housing for

social rent and intermediate market sale are consistent with the London

housing plan.i This, and design requirements, are clearly set out in a

specific planning advice note. This highlights the Council's commitment to

deliver the maximum amount of affordable, family sized housing in the

borough, but also offers pragmatism and flexibility so that individual

schemes can be assessed on their own merits.

49 However, there are weaknesses in the current housing strategies and

policies which provide the framework for strategic housing service delivery:

renewal of the Council's now expired housing strategy has not yet

started;

the Council's first private sector housing strategy is only at first draft

stage. Sub strategies and policies related to empty homes, affordable

warmth and houses in multiple occupation are basic or still in draft form;

and

work has begun on addressing the lack of a robust asset management

strategy in relation to the Council's own housing stock but is some wayfrom completion.

i the council aims for 50 per cent of new housing to be affordable where

this is financially viable, in a 70:30 rented:sale ratio



24/43

50 While the Council has plans to address these gaps, its timescales for

doing so are very challenging because a number of factors need to come

together to make this happen. These are both external such as the

Government's review of the housing revenue account funding arrangements

and further internal work, including the completion and analysis of the

housing needs survey and stock condition data, plus consultation with

stakeholders, which is only underway so far on the private sector housing

strategy. In each of the current strategies the Council lacks clarity on how

the plans contribute to its overall aims, clear milestones to support delivery

and the outcomes expected in relation to diversity and value for money.

They also do not adequately address how future funding risksi will be

managed. Current strategic documents do not therefore provide a robust

framework to demonstrate what needs to change, how this will happen or

how the Council will measure its success towards its stated aims.

51 Limited outcomes have been achieved through the Council's approach

to equality impact assessments (EIAs). They have been undertaken onsome key strategies and are self-critical, which has led to some

improvements, such as better translation arrangements for key documents.

However little has been measured in part because of a lack of baseline

data. Consultation to assess the impact of service delivery or whether new

or improved homes address the range of diverse needs in the community

has been limited. No EIAs have been undertaken in relation to council

house improvements or the adaptations service. At present EIAs do not

provide a robust assessment of the service's contribution to improving

equality and community cohesion in the borough.

Capacity to deliver: does the Council have the capacityto deliver its housing vision effectively now and in thefuture?

Are the right ski lls and tools in place to ensure effective delivery of

housing priorities?

52 This is an area where the Council is performing adequately. The

Council is focussing well on ensuring it has the right skills in place, both for

now and in a more challenging financial climate. This is supported by astrong approach to maximising the talent of the Council's workforce. It has

sufficient land to deliver its new housing targets. However, existing staff

skills to deliver improvement are not consistently strong. Some council

member development is also needed and the reasons for negative external

perceptions of political support for some housing options need to be

explored. Gaps in information technology are being addressed but are

currently weakening service delivery.

i key schemes depend on funding provided by other agencies. The

borough's investment plan is also still in draft



25/43

53 The Council has a strong focus on ensuring it has the right people to

deliver its housing priorities. It is currently reviewing its entire structure a

process which has been brought into sharper focus by the government's

announcements of reduced revenue funding. Final proposals have not yet

been agreed, but the Council is seeking to streamline its management

arrangements and focus on skillset matching to ensure the new structure iswell placed to deliver its strategic objectives. It is focussing on how its

capacity to deliver its housing plans can be enhanced, to take advantage of

new ways of working and to better exploit commissioning opportunities.

54 A positive strategic approach to building and retaining skills is helping to

boost capacity. The Council has a proactive approach to support staff, with

comprehensive training and development arrangements aligned to personal

and organisational development. Support and communication arrangements

have recently been enhanced in recognition of the impact of the current

economic climate and the challenging decisions that need to be made

around future staffing levels. The HR strategy is being renewed next year,

recognising that new ways of working need to continue to be supported

through effective people management. Currently soundings are being taken

with elected staff representatives, ahead of a planned staff survey which will

inform the strategy focus. This approach helps to maximise people's talents

and abilities.

55 The Council has sufficient land available to achieve its short and

medium term housing development targets. Its strategic land assessment

shows it has adequate land to provide the housing required under the

London housing plan targets and its core strategy until 2023/24. Although inthe medium to long term actual housing delivery is reliant on infrastructure

funding, this reduces the risk that development of new housing will stop

because suitable sites cannot be found.

56 Existing capacity to deliver the Council's plans is mixed. The right

capacity and extensive knowledge, skills and experience exist in some

areas of the service, such as planning and regeneration, capital programme

delivery and procurement. Sickness levels are also relatively low. However,

in some areas such as in housing strategy and private sector housing, staff

need development to promote greater capacity to improve. Internal jointworking also needs improvement in some areas, though not always for the

same reason. For example, the relationship between housing and adult and

community services is poor and so ineffective. In contrast, planning and

housing strategy staff work well together, but the teams are not co-located

and a lot of time is spent communicating and checking information between

the two functions. This increases inefficiency and opportunity costs. The

Council recognises this and plans to help address these issues through its

structural proposals. However, current capacity is only optimal in some

areas of the service.



26/43

57 Some development of Council member capacity is needed. The large

turnover of councillors in May 2010 means that there is need to ensure a

stronger awareness of future policy direction. Although there is some

understanding of this, there are internal and external perceptions that some

Councillors remain resistant to alternatives to Council-led delivery of

housing initiatives and future management of stock. Currently no Councillorsare members of the boards of any RSLs operating in the borough. The

authority needs to be sure all its Councillors have a realistic understanding

of how its proposals fit within the emerging policy environment, the range of

options available and the potentially challenging decisions that might need

to be made.

58 The Council is investing in new information technology to address

significant gaps in current systems. In particular, it is currently working to

implement new asset management databases for both council and private

sector housing data, including software to model investment decisions, to

record action taken and to enable better outcome reporting. These are not

in place currently, restricting the Council's ability to understand the potential

and actual impact of its decisions and make more effective use of its

resources.

Are effect ive arrangements in place to keep the delivery of housing

priorities on track and promote a culture of cont inuous improvement?

59 In this area the Council is performing adequately. Leadership of the

service is now strong. Senior officers and key elected members have a

strong awareness of what needs to be achieved and are focussed on findingsolutions and implementing new ways of working to drive forward

improvements. In some key areas a focus on service quality is delivering

positive outcomes for customers. However, there are significant

weaknesses in the performance management of the service overall and in

the adaptations service for vulnerable people, in particular. Risk

management and learning are also inconsistent, hindering the Council's

ability to maximise the improvements it can deliver.

60 Leadership of the service is now strong. It has improved significantly

over the past two years, with senior officers and key council members nowhaving a strong awareness of what the service does well and the key areas

for improvement. At corporate level there is also better understanding of

how the Council's revised structure and its commissioning ability will support

the service going forward. Managers are clear about priorities and are

implementing a systematic approach to improvement as part of current and

planned activities. This has, for example, already resulted in increased

private sector housing capacity and plans for better performance

management. Although current strategies and plans do not fully reflect this,

the service is led by officers who are proactively responding the challenges

the service faces.



27/43

61 Changes in the political make up of the Council have given a fresh

impetus to leadership, transparency and challenge to policy decisions. The

change to an unopposed ruling party could have created a vacuum in these

areas. However, new councillors have constructively challenged policy and

direction, leading to renewed debate around future housing proposals. This

has increased capacity for new thinking. The housing portfolio holder alsoshows a strong understanding and commitment to improving the quality and

supply of housing and achieving greater value for money. The Council's

commitment to housing has been retained while capacity for exploring better

ways to achieve its objectives has been increased.

62 In limited areas performance arrangements are effective. The Council

closely monitors the forward supply of housing sites, with its annual

monitoring report highlighted as best practice by the former Government

Office for London. Close monitoring is also in place for the Council housing

improvement programme, using a range of financial, quantitative and quality

indicators to track progress against programme targets. This provides key

monitoring information for the Council in these areas.

63 The Council's approach has also ensured customer focussed outcomes

in some key areas. For example, new council housing is designed to meet

space standards which significantly exceed minimum requirements and

more closely reflect emerging thinking by the Mayor's office on providing

greater living space for families. This is in preference to additional 'units'

being provided. Similarly, council house improvement schemes have been

designed with residents and incorporate wider security and environmental

improvements, for example, ahead of maximising the total number ofimprovements. Though this focus on quality is not applied universally, it

provides the community with some assurance that the Council is seeking to

achieve qualitative as well as quantitative outcomes.

64 Strong leadership has resulted in a focus on finding solutions and

overcoming barriers. The Council is not put off by significant challenges,

such as the deferred infrastructure decisions. Instead, planners and

regeneration officers continue to work closely with developers to achieve

better outcomes over the long term and to seek alternative options. For

example, the Council has now developed a new proposal for estate renewalafter failure of its PFI i funding bid. It responded to the failure of the LHC by

working closely with developers and the HCAii to get funding switched to its

council house building programme. This will provide the first new council

housing in the borough for over 20 years, with the first properties, at William

Street Quarter in Barking, due for completion towards the end of this

calendar year. This ensures momentum for improvement is not lost when

things do not go to plan.

i public finance initiative a former government model for private sectorinvestment in public sector led initiatives

ii Homes and Communities Agency a national agency which provides

government funding for affordable housing



28/43

65 The Council also takes opportunities to lead initiatives in the region. For

example, it was one of 14 authorities which volunteered for the local

housing company initiative nationally and has taken a lead on implementing

a community low carbon zone, with its initiative in Barking Town Centre

aiming to reduce carbon emissions by 20 per cent and support people in

fuel poverty. This approach means it is open to new ideas and initiatives to

help support its objectives.

66 Going forward, the Council has an emerging pragmatic approach to

delivering its housing ambitions. It recognises that it will need to consider

new ways of working, such as joint ventures, and to improve working

relationships with RSLs to make best use of their skills and experience and

access potential funding streams. It is also aware that different management

arrangements for its own stock i may be needed. There are some

perceptions that there is yet to be full political support for having all options

'on the table'. While this needs to be addressed, the Council has already

made some important decisions, such as the 7 million capital fundingcommitted to kickstart its estate renewal programme. There is a clear drive

towards exploring a wider range of options to achieve necessary

improvements.

67 But performance management arrangements are poor overall. The

Council is in the process of reviewing and improving its performance

arrangements for the service, but there are currently significant gaps in the

scope of reported information at both operational and strategic level. Few

strategic housing indicators are reported as part of current housing

performance reports, above team level. Additionally, while action plans aremonitored, the Council does not effectively assess whether this has led to

quality of life improvements or contributed to its wider objectivesii , as

strategies rarely feature clear success measures to assess this. Delivery

against existing housing strategy priorities have also not been publicly

reported and there is no scrutiny or external challenge of performance. The

Council's current performance management arrangements are not effective

in underpinning its progress towards key priorities.

68 Poor management of the DFG and adaptations service has resulted in

poor customer and value for money outcomes. Ineffective control has

resulted in lost funding, poor service delivery and a lack of integration

across service areas. The Council is now reviewing this service and has

completed an options paper on its future. However, the robustness of this is

undermined by a lack of challenge. For example, there is still limited

communication between the adult and community services team ii i and

housing services about the arrangements and no consultation with service

users, community groups or the current HIA service provider has yet taken

i subject to stock options appraisal and consultation with residents

ii there is some reference in the annual monitoring report, but this is onlymonitored annually, 12 months after year end.

ii i which administers major adaptation grant funding and adaptations to

council homes on behalf of the housing service



29/43

place. It is not possible to determine how well the Council will achieve

improvements that customers will recognise in this area.

69 Risk management arrangements are mixed. The Council has a strong

corporate approach to risk and this is translated into divisional and service

based risk plans. Senior managers are well aware of the risks for the

housing service going forward and have put into place some effectiveactions to mitigate them. However, some of the significant risks to the

service are not well documented in current strategies and plans and there

has also been little scrutiny of these or the strategic housing service as a

whole through the Council's scrutiny board.i The Council is not ensuring an

agreed approach to mitigating risks and alternative solutions is in place.

70 Arrangements for learning are also mixed. The Council can

demonstrate some learning from other organisations, which has led to a

clear awareness of what excellence should look like in some areas of the

service. However, it has weak arrangements for learning from its own

experience. Its approach to seeking customer feedback is limited and it

does not have systematic processes for measuring 'quality of life' impacts

from projects and initiatives it is involved in or funding. The Council is

missing opportunities to identify good practice and areas for improvement to

feed into future initiatives and proposals.

Does the Counci l plan its finances and other resources robust ly, to

support the effective delivery of its strategic housing priorities and

achieve value for money?

71 The Council is performing below minimum requirements in this area. Itis not ensuring value for money (VFM) within the service, as it lacks a

strategic framework, targets and comparative data and is poor at analysing

the VFM of initiatives it has invested in. Although improving, it has not

ensured it maximises external resources and its spending decisions are not

informed by robust investment plans. It has however sought to positively

influence future government decisions on council housing revenue funding

and has successfully attracted some resources from national and

sub-regional housing funding schemes. It has also re-directed some

resources to support housing outcomes. Planning processes help deliver

better outcomes from local developments.

72 The Council is not ensuring value for money in its strategic housing

services. It was assessed as having an 'adequate' approach in its corporate

use of resources in 2009 ii , but this is not translated into a clear approach at

service level. The service does not have a clear strategic approach to

promote value for money and lacks any benchmarking data to show

comparative quality, performance or cost, except in the planning service. It

i membership of the 'living and working board' has changed significantly

as a result of the May 2010 elections. It is now developing its knowledge

and understanding to help it provide a more effective challenge goingforward

ii December 2009 Annual Audit Letter to the Council (from the Audit

Commission) based on 2008/09 annual audit



30/43

has no efficiency targets at service level to support wider corporate aims.

While some tentative steps are being taken to improve its approach, there is

no service framework in place to guide this. The Council cannot

demonstrate a structured assessment of whether services provide value for

money or how they will improve.

73 Funding streams have not always been maximised to increaseresources. For example, the Council has missed opportunities to claim

around 1.5 million of additional external disabled facilities grant funding

over the past three years, while it also underspent private sector grant

funding until last year. Few loans are provided in place of improvement

grants to recycle funding, nor does it charge any fees for its private sector

work. Internal recharges for services provided by other departments have

not been reviewed systematically, with some estimates that this could save

at least 4 million each year. Some steps are being taken to improve this,

but as current strategies and action plans lack clarity about the level of

resources required, it is not clear how effectively this will change in future.

74 Partnerships have not been evaluated in relation to value for money.

The Council has not undertaken a review of internal and external

partnerships to assess how effectively they are helping to deliver shared

priorities for housing. It has not used existing strategies and targets to

formally sign up internal or external partners, such as PCTsi , the HIA and

RSLs, to delivery, sharing responsibilities for targets or identifying

opportunities to share resources. As a result it is missing opportunities to

maximise the contribution of partners in delivering the vision for the area.

75 The Council cannot be certain it has the financial resources to deliver itshousing plans. A number of key proposals ii rely almost entirely on funding

and investment decisions from other agencies. The Council needs a

favourable outcome from the government's review of housing revenue

account fundingii i to ensure the financial viability of its stock and housing

management service and to lever in other funding. It needs, for example,

38 million to bridge the funding gap for its estate renewal programme,

between the 7 million it has committed and the total cost. It anticipates the

review outcome will help, but the level of headroom it will generate is

expected to be limited. Its major regeneration schemes are also constrained

by a lack of approved funding for major infrastructure. Some investment

decisions have been deferred and other funding cannot be guaranteed. iv

This could result in the Council being unable to achieve the desired

improvements at its major regeneration sites and only a small percentage of

the homes it has planned.

i Primary Care Trusts (within the NHS

ii including new housing delivery, estate renewal and investment in

maintenance of council housing.

ii i a national review of how council house management and maintenance isfunded.

iv such as the Docklands Light Railway extension and later phases of the

proposed bus service



31/43

76 Spending decisions are not yet informed by robust proposals for

housing investment. The Council has drafted a borough investment plan,

but this is not yet complete and it lacks clarity on investment in housing

services other than major projects. Budgets for key services, such as private

sector housing and disabled facilities grants, have not been assessed either

in terms of what they have delivered to date or against actual and potentialdemand, despite significant previous under and over spends respectively.

Resources are not clearly identified against any strategic proposals and

strategies do not target resources to particular areas or groups. The Council

cannot be certain if its resources match its priorities.

77 The impact of initiatives and funding decisions is not routinely captured.

Individual teams often monitor the number of outputs, such as private sector

interventions or new homes built, but the Council rarely captures the actual

impact of delivery on local people. For example, it has improved housing in

unpopular areas where turnover has been high due to significant actual or

perceived levels of anti-social behaviour (ASB) and crime. However, it does

not know whether the new or improved housing has led to more sustainable

communities or reduced ASB, crime levels or perceptions of crime. Similarly

it has little information on changes made at a local level, such as private

sector housing improvements. Little strategic housing service data is

captured in corporate performance reports. This limits its ability to

understand the contribution to the Council's overall objectives or to evaluate

whether resource levels are appropriate.

78 The Council has sought to maximise outcomes from the government's

review of housing revenue funding. It has played a positive role indiscussions with government officials, submitting proposals which offer

realistic options for the Treasury to consider. While the actual outcome of

the review is out of the Council's hands, it has played a constructive role in

seeking to secure the best outcomes the borough can achieve.

79 The Council has successfully secured some external funding for new

housing. It was successful in seeking approval from the HCA to switch

NAHPi funding from the LHC to its own house building programme.

Together with funding for RSL schemes, this is expected to total around

18.5 million between 2009/10 and 2010/11. Uncertainty about theoutcomes of the government's forthcoming spending review makes it

difficult to predict how much of future planned NAHP fundsii will be made

available. However, the Council hopes that proposed changes in the

planning, funding and delivery of new homes in London will improve its

funding prospects, particularly as it has closely aligned its plans with the

region's identified priorities.

i national affordable housing programme

ii of between 105.5 million and 165.8 million, over the next four years



32/43

80 Some sub-regional funding has been attracted for private sector

housing work. For example, 1.6 million has been secured to support

bringing empty homes back into use, along with 140,000 to address high

risk safety hazards in housing occupied by vulnerable people. The Council

is also bidding for 're-new' energy efficiency funding to improve the thermal

efficiency of dwellings. This supplements the Council's own resources toimprove outcomes.

81 Some resources have been re-directed to service priorities and are

planned to do so in future. For example, the Council created additional

posts for the private sector housing team in recognition of its higher profile

and it has also committed 7 million to kickstart estate renewal. It provided

funds for a new primary school as part of the Barking Riverside

development, in light of cancelled BSF funding.i It has also withdrawn some

land disposal plans so that the necessary infrastructure can be provided

which support its housing plans or used other sites for housing development

directly.ii Its draft investment plans mean housing will be second only to

education in capital funding allocations, with 76.6 million earmarked for

housing over the next four years. The Council is targeting resources to

support improvements in the housing service.

82 Planning processes support value for money in the delivery of strategic

housing objectives. Clear guidance is provided which sets out expectations

and these help ensure that suitable infrastructure and community facilities

are provided, promotes the right quality standards and helps maximise the

level of affordable housing achieved. This helps deliver better outcomes

from developments in the borough.

Do the Council's commissioning and procurement arrangements for

strategic housing delivery help to maximise value for money and

sustainability?

83 The Council's performance in this area is below minimum requirements.

Despite some procurement activity which may have improved VFM, the

Council is not analysing outcomes to ensure this is the case. In can

however demonstrate reduced commissioning fees for some work. It is

supporting greater sustainability through existing and planned procurementactivity.

i Building schools for the future' funding was cancelled following the

government's review of the BSF programme

ii for example, the St George's Centre and Canington Road sites are nowearmarked for new primary schools and unviable council garage sites

have been used for the provision of new three and four bedroom social

rented homes



33/43

84 The Council cannot demonstrate value for money improvements as a

result of its procurement arrangements. Despite procurement and supply

chain management activity related to the council home improvement

programme and joint procurement of the SHMA, the Council lacks any data

to quantify the related savings or added value offered. Benchmarking of

costs and service outcomes is extremely limited. A new procurementexercise is planned for 2011 when the existing council home improvement

contracts end. Work is now taking place to check what new opportunities

might exist, such as collaborative procurement with neighbouring authorities

or more emphasis on sustainability and local employment. However, the

Council cannot currently demonstrate positive outcomes from its

procurement choices.

85 Preliminary costs and fees for commissioning capital housing projects

have reduced significantly. In 2007/08 they totalled 2.6 million, but reduced

to 0.95 million, (a fall of 63 per cent) by this year, taking account of

changes in the size of programmes in place. The Council lacks a breakdown

of the different savings for different projects, but this has resulted in extra

resources to invest in service delivery.

86 Sustainability is reflected in some commissioning and procurement

activity. In particular, the Council's improvement programme is now based

on schemes which consider the safety and security of residents and

environmental wellbeing. Specifications have been changed and the life

cycle of materials is taken into account in material choices. This helps to

promote greater value for money through more sustainable communities

and reduced renewal and repair costs over the long term.

87 The Council is considering providing minor adaptation equipment at

accredited retail outlets. It is expanding the current provision of mobility aids

at local specialist outlets to provide people with quick and easy local access

to adaptations on a 'prescription' basis. This can help to increase access

and reduce waiting times for adaptations, helping to maintain independence

in people's own homes.

Improving housing outcomes for the local community:

is the strategic approach to housing delivering betteroutcomes for the local community?

Is new market and affordable housing offering greater choice for new

and existing households and promoting sustainable communities?

88 This is an area where the Council is performing adequately. In future

years the Council's plans for new housing development provide scope for it

to significantly exceed the targets set out in the draft London Plan. It

continues to push for the maximum level of affordable housing that is viable

on new schemes and has a strong focus on quality and sustainability within

new housing developments. However, its recent track record in delivering

new homes and affordable properties is not strong and it lacks clarity on



34/43

how it is meeting or planning to meet the housing needs of everyone in the

community.

89 Going forward, the Council predicts significant improvement in the level

of new homes it enables. Between 2011/12 and 2014/15, it expects new

housing supply to average between 1,242 and 1,479 properties i annually,

significantly exceeding the new proposed annual target of 1,065 properties.It also has the land available to deliver a similar level of homes for the

following 15 years, although much of the ongoing development is subject to

infrastructure in

Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs

Documents

Transcript of Strategic council housing plans in London boroughs