Agenda item

 

To consider the report and presentation on the Housing Strategy Draft Action Plan – 2025-2030.

 

 

At the Chair’s invitation, the Cabinet Member for Housing, Councillor Beresford, introduced the item and explained that the Draft Action Plan was being brought to IPSC following its review of the draft Housing Strategy 2025-2030 at September’s meeting. The Housing Strategy had since been approved by Cabinet on 15^th September 2025.

 

Councillor Beresford thanked members of ISPC for their involvement during the development of the Housing Strategy and confirmed that IPSC’s request to add some specific text around ASB and a further case study had also been approved at Cabinet. Councillor Beresford was also pleased to confirm that a date had been arranged for the “deep dive” workshop on ASB which IPSC members had expressed an interest in at the September meeting. This was due to take place on 4^th December 2025. The Chair noted that more information regarding this workshop would be provided in the Work Programme item later in the agenda.

 

Councillor Beresford explained that the Housing Strategy Action Plan would be approved by the Strategic Director for Adults, Housing & Public Health and it would be published on the Council website, alongside the approved Housing Strategy. Progress on the Action Plan would be monitored by the Strategic Housing Team and it was intended to bring the Action Plan back to IPSC to oversee performance on an annual basis at the end of each financial year.

 

Garry Newton, Housing Development Intelligence Coordinatorwent through the presentation which accompanied the Report and Action Plan, making the following points –

 

·       The four priorities of the Housing Strategy and the key aims under each priority formed the basis of the Action Plan.

 

·       There were three cross-cutting themes which underpinned the Council’s approach and were woven through every target in the Action Plan – 1) to keep residents healthy and warm, 2) to reduce carbon emissions and 3) to reduce inequalities in and between communities.

 

·       Each of the four priorities had its own individual Action Plan with key performance indicators (KPIs) that would measure the success of the strategy. There would be a total of 16 KPIs through the four priorities.

 

·       Each individual Action Plan would set out what the Council and its partners and stakeholders would do over the five years of the Strategy to ensure that the aims were met. The data and the actions that would be used to measure against the KPIs were also set out.

 

·       Key milestones were highlighted for each of the four priorities:-

 

Priority 1 Building high quality, sustainable and affordable new homes) – progress being made on key housing sites around the borough (e.g Bassingthorpe Farm) and the Council's own delivery programme to build social housing (714 new homes had been built since 2018 and the target of 1000 homes by summer 2027 should be achieved).

 

Priority 2 Improving the safety, quality and energy efficiency of homes - tenant satisfaction measures being monitored; a good outcome from the upcoming inspection by the Regulator of Social Housing; and all emergency repairs, complaints, damp and mould and gas safety issues being dealt with on time. Energy efficiency improvements would help residents reduce fuel bills whilst also reducing the impact of carbon emissions. A key indicator under this Priority would be to ensure that all council homes achieved energy performance rating C by 2030.

 

Priority 3 Supporting residents to live independently, including through prevention of homelessness - waiting times being reduced for adaptations to existing homes; new homes designed and built to meet a range of physical needs; and the provision of affordable and temporary accommodation increased to help prevent and relieve homelessness.

 

Priority 4 Ensuring that neighbourhoods are safe, happy, and thriving – the number of long-term empty homes being reduced; positive impacts being made in neighbourhoods through tenant engagement work; and the engagement of residents on environmental improvements.

 

·       A high-level spreadsheet tracker would sit behind the Action Plan and would be used to monitor the performance of KPIs. This tracker had been shared with the Chair but it was not intended to publish the tracker due to the high level of detail. The tracker would identify all data used to monitor each measure, where the data is held and reported and how often it is updated. The tracker would link to the Council's existing performance reporting through the Housing Quality Improvement & Performance Board and would be monitored monthly in-house, with data presented to IPSC every July.

 

·       Softer intelligence would also be gathered - for example, via the Place and Quality Panel, to ensure schemes were delivered with input from cross-council services and that lessons were learnt from outcomes of recent delivery. Case studies would be used to present these outcomes rather than hard data.

 

·       Some measures would be monitored by using external data, often government data such as fuel poverty levels. It was noted that data  published at a national level would usually lag between six months to two years behind. Therefore, some impact of the strategy would not be reported on for up to two years afterwards.

 

·       An example KPI score card was worked through for members which demonstrated different ways in which performance would be measured under the Action Plan.

 

The Chair invited members of IPSC to raise questions and queries on the Report, draft Action Plan and presentation and in the ensuing question and answer session the following points were raised:-

 

Councillor Beck asked about the current level of Right to Buy purchases and whether some were still going through from before the deadline of 21 November 2024 (whereafter the Government revised the Right to Buy scheme and significantly reduced the available discount under the scheme).

 

The Housing Development Intelligence Coordinator explained that this data was not readily available but that the number of completions was reported on monthly so this data could be provided to Councillor Beck outside of the meeting.

 

The Chair referred to the ongoing target of 1,000 new homes by 2027 and noted that the Housing Strategy was to last for five years, beyond this target date. Was there a plan in place for beyond 2027 in respect of new council houses?

 

Sarah Watts, Strategic Housing Manager, responded that the council was not far off the target of 1,000 new homes by 2027 and that plans for after 2027 were already developing. The Strategic Housing manager stated that there would need to be a balance struck between delivering more new homes and improving existing stock. John Holman, the Interim Assistant Director of Housing added that some of this preparatory work would come out in the budget planning that the Housing team were currently undertaking.

 

Councillor Thorp asked a question around Priority 3 and the aim to build and acquire a range of housing types to meet the needs of older residents. Councillor Thorp asked whether this meant building clusters of bungalows in one area or building the odd bungalow in different areas.

 

The Strategic Housing Manager confirmed that service would take a mixed approach to development for older residents, which would be led by what land was available and what opportunities were presented. Each option would be considered on its merits and either one-off developments or larger packages would be considered if they provided good value for money and met the needs of local communities. The Strategic Housing Manager also commented that not all elderly residents wanted to live in bungalows so options for lower-level blocks of flats could also be considered as such developments were less land hungry and provided alternative opportunities for accessible living.

 

In a supplementary question, the Chair asked for more information on the use of adaptation grants and whether this funding came from central government or was Council-funded.

 

The Strategic Housing Manager explained that there were different pots of funding available for adaptations – some for properties that were in private ownership and some for Council housing. The Council would need to work smart to ensure that where a property was right for a particular person or family, they could be enabled to stay there via adaptations. If a property was no longer deemed suitable, the Allocations Policy could potentially be used to find something more suitable within existing Council stock. Service would endeavour to work with that person's needs to support them to be independent.

 

In a follow-on question surrounding Priority 3, Councillor Thorp raised some concerns around the Allocations Policy and applicants being confused as to where they sat on the priority list, referencing an ongoing case he was dealing with. Councillor Thorp referred to a conversation he had had with the Monitoring Officer who had advised him to consult with the Interim Assistant Director of Housing, but he understood that the Interim Assistant Director of Housing would shortly be leaving the council.

 

The Interim Assistant Director of Housing confirmed that the newly appointed Assistant Director of Housing would be starting on 3^rd November 2025 but that he would be happy to meet with Councillor Thorp to discuss his concerns prior to that date. The Interim Assistant Director of Housing also suggested that members might benefit from a “deep dive” look at the new Housing Allocations Policy that had been recently developed, potentially via a member briefing.

 

Councillor Beresford stated that she was aware of the case Councillor Thorp referred to and whilst she accepted that there had been some confusion around the advert in that instance, she was satisfied that the Allocation Policy itself was clear and fair. Councillor Beresford explained that the policy in respect of rural allocations had been explained to Councillor Thorp and that work had been done to streamline the priorities down to four, and that rather than having a waiting list, each applicant sat under a different priority. Councillor Beresford reinforced the offer to bring the Housing Allocations Policy back to IPSC for further consideration.

 

The Chair asked for confirmation that the new Housing Allocations Policy was agreed and finalised. Councillor Beresford confirmed that that it was in the process of being implemented and would be going live in December 2025.

 

Councillor Steele referred to the stated aim to end fuel poverty and asked what was being done to support residents in their homes who live in fuel poverty. Councillor Beresford commented that one of the key priorities under the Housing Strategy was to make homes more fuel efficient and that there were examples of this being done across the borough by installing more efficient heating systems (such as air source heat pumps), increasing insulation and ensuring work was done on properties to meet the minimum EPC C rating. The Financial Inclusion team would also work to support struggling tenants and grants were available to residents in fuel poverty. Councillor Beresford also mentioned the work of partner agencies such as Energy Wise, which the Council signposted residents to.

 

In a supplementary question, Councillor Steele asked how the work Rotherham Council did measured up against the work of other local authorities in the area of fuel poverty and whether the Council works with neighbouring authorities on projects. Councillor Beresford confirmed that the Council does work with neighbouring authorities but couldn’t comment on how the Council engages nationally in this area and would get back to Councillor Steele with this information.

 

The Interim Assistant Director for Housing added that the work on getting existing properties up to EPC C rating was funded by a government grant and that the Council match-funded it. There was a budget of around £18 million to spend and the Council followed the national agenda of “fabric first”, whereby improvements to the fabric of the property were prioritised to improve efficiencies across the housing stock. It was explained that the government grant only allowed the Council to bring current EPC rated D properties up to a C rating so where there were properties with an E rating, the Council would have to self-fund these. The programme was based on “worst first” and where further prioritisation was necessary, deprivation levels would be considered to build up to 2030. If more government grants were to become available, the council would apply for these.

 

Councillor Tinsley asked whether when the Council looked to acquire properties it would only consider properties with a minimum of EPC C rating or whether it would carry out work on lower rated properties to ensure that they were a minimum C rating “when let”. The Interim Assistant Director for Housing confirmed that the Council could acquire a property and then carry out work to bring it up to an EPC C rating. Most properties now, when acquired, had this minimum C rating, but there could be examples of the Council buying back former Right to Buy stock where the EPC rating was lower than a C so remedial work would be required.

 

In a follow up question, Councillor Tinsley asked whether the Council engaged with the private housing market and commented that there were private housing estates within his ward of Maltby which could benefit from Council investment  to bring them up to standard. The Interim Assistant director confirmed that the Council did buy property in the open market and also, had first option built in to buy back former Right to Buy properties. Officers scanned the market in areas where properties were required and there was value to be obtained.

 

The Chair requested more information on the new Caretaking Teams referred to in Priority 4 and whether these would be brand new teams or would be a shared role with the Places team? Councillor Beresford explained that this was an area that service was focusing on following low satisfaction responses to surveys  on current caretaking services. Caretaking services were currently run by contractors and there would be an exercise undertaken to scope a remodel of the service. Councillor Beresford confirmed that once a decision on this had been made, IPSC would be informed.

 

In relation to Priority 3, Councillor Sheppard asked for more information on the work that was already done with health partners, the Health & Wellbeing Board and third sector organisations to ensure that the Council built properties that benefit both the physical and mental health of residents and also what opportunities there were in terms of funding by working with partners to get schemes off the ground.

 

The Strategic Housing Manager confirmed that regular conversations took place at the Strategic Housing Forum. The Housing Team worked closely with registered housing providers that provided housing to meet a range of needs. There were links through the Health and Wellbeing Board and service engaged with colleagues within the different NHS structures and attended various external boards on a regular basis which considered issues such as hospital discharge, learning disability and autism needs. The Strategic Housing Manager emphasised that service did not just look at the Council’s own housing intelligence in isolation, but in the context of data from other services and providers within the community to build a holistic picture. This overview enabled service to formulate plans around the needs of an area or group of particular need that might not have been met.

 

The Strategic Housing Manager gave the example of current plans to update the Housing Need Assessment. This would be pulled into a Housing Needs Study that would be used to help shape the future delivery programme and would  contribute to the development of the local plan. Conversations would continue with developers and other local organisations to support with this.

 

In a follow up question around Priority 4, Councillor Sheppard asked what was being done to foster good social behaviour within communities, for example younger families keeping an eye on elderly neighbours. Could this work be developed with the new caretaking teams and fostered into a new strategic opportunity to strengthen communities?

 

The Interim Assistant Director of Housing confirmed that the plans for the new caretaking scheme were in their infancy and that service was looking to a more joined up approach generally with other services and external partners – for example, Adult Social Care, Public Health, the NHS and the police. A number of opportunities would be considered to develop the housing service for the future and engage tenants more, including the possibility of neighbourhood satellite offices. These conversations would be taking place over the next 12-18 months, with the first meeting of officers to consider new proposals due to take place in December. The Interim Assistance Director of Housing encouraged members to provide any useful input they might have.

 

In response, Councillor Sheppard asked how service was planning to ensure that communities were involved from the start of this process to shape what the new plans looked like. Councillor Beresford responded that tenant engagement was very important and referenced the involvement of the two co-optee members from Rotherfed who sat on IPSC. It was essential to involve and seek the views of the people who lived within the neighbourhoods themselves so work would be done with tenant engagement groups and community groups and Councillor Beresford confirmed that service would be looking at ways to expand the groups of tenants involved.

 

The Chair thanked officers for their input and members for the questions asked.

 

Resolved:-

 

(1)  That the contents of the Housing Strategy 2025–2030 draft Action Plan be noted;

 

(2)  That IPSC would review the progress of the Action Plan on an annual basis throughout the Strategy period. As performance would be measured April-March, it is requested that the Action Plan progress report is presented to IPSC every July throughout the life of the Strategy period; and

 

(3)  That service provides updates on any changes made to either the Action Plan or the Housing Strategy in each annual progress report, given the delegated authority to the Strategic Director to approve the Action Plan and make any minor data amendments to the Housing Strategy.