Agenda item

 

To receive and consider the Housing Strategy 2025-30 Progress Report Year 1 (2025-26), which provides an update on progress in delivering the Housing Strategy 2025-2030 during year one (from April 2025 to March 2026).

 

 

At the Chair’s invitation, Councillor Beresford, Cabinet Member for Housing (Cabinet Member), introduced the item and explained that the Housing Strategy (Strategy) had been approved and published in late 2025, after a period of consultation with residents, tenants, council officers, partners and Members.

 

The Year One progress report and accompanying presentation highlighted the progress made against key performance indicators to deliver the Strategy and improve the lives of residents across the borough.

 

The Cabinet Member reminded Members that the Housing Strategy was a cross-tenure strategy and that work delivered under it for was for the benefit of all Rotherham residents, whether they were council tenants, tenants of housing associations, tenants of private landlords or homeowners.

 

Sarah Clyde, Service Director for Housing (Service Director) took Members through the presentation accompanying the report, highlighting the following points:

 

Priority 1 – Building high quality, sustainable and affordable homes

 

It was explained that it was crucially important to have housing growth within the borough to meet current and future housing need. It was reported that the number of residents on the housing waiting list had reduced over the last six months, largely as a result of the introduction of the new Housing Allocations Policy in December 2025. There were still 5,500 residents on the housing waiting list and many residents in the housing market looking for affordable homes to rent or buy.

 

One of the key performance indicators (KPIs) under Priority 1 of the Strategy, was to ensure that enough new homes of diverse and affordable nature were built. In the year 2025-26, a total of 778 new homes had been built across the borough. This did not meet the government's new target of 1,111 new homes, but the Service Director commented that current challenging market conditions meant that developers were not building as quickly. The housing targets set were very challenging, and the Service Director assured Members that the Housing team would continue to work with developers to meet housing need, whilst also ensuring a high-quality standard of build.

 

It was confirmed that in 2025-26, the local planning authority had approved 656 additional homes through the planning process, which evidenced a clear pipeline of sites for development. The Service Director explained that the Local Plan Review would also be carried out over the next couple of years and would form the strategic spatial development plan for Rotherham, linking in with the South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority (SYMCA).

 

Another KPI under Priority 1 was to ensure that a minimum of 25% of new homes were affordable housing. The Council had over-achieved on this KPI as the percentage of new affordable homes in 2025/26 represented 34% of the total delivery. This 34% covered homes built by developer partners, housing associations and the council’s own build programme.

 

The council had committed to delivering 1,000 new council houses by summer 2027. These would not necessarily all be new build properties, but a mix of new homes and older properties converted or brought back to use. By the end of 2025-26, a total of 788 additional council homes had been delivered. There were a further 212 required to reach the target of 1,000, but the Service Director was confident that with increasing numbers of council new-builds, the acquisition of new and existing properties into council stock and a number of new sites being developed (e.g Maltby, Eastwood, Wath & West Melton), this target would be met.

 

The Service Director confirmed that as well as investment from the Housing Revenue Account (HRA), the council had also managed to secure £12 million of grant funding from SYMCA and Homes England to support further new build homes. Rotherham had been one of the first local authorities to draw down the new Social and Affordable Housing Programme (SARP) funding, which became available in 2026-27.

 

Priority 2 – Improving the safety, quality and energy efficiency of our homes

 

Priority 2 under the Strategy was concerned with ensuring that the existing stock within the borough (both council housing and the private rental sector) is safe, of high quality and is energy efficient.

 

The Service Director explained that the Tenant Satisfaction Measures (TSMs) on council owned properties had been included in the presentation but had not been provided within the IPSC Agenda pack due to publication of the Cabinet report the day prior to the meeting.

 

The TSMs were reported annually to the Regulator of Social Housing and would be made publicly available on the council website. The Housing service conducted an annual survey to ask council tenants how they felt about their properties on a number of measures, for example:- how satisfied they were, how safe they felt and their views on the quality of repairs.

 

It was explained that when compared against the benchmarking figure in the middle column of the table on slide 6 (which represented averages across the country for 2024-25), Rotherham’s scores for 2025-26, were all in the upper quartile of results. The 25/26 benchmarking would not be available until November, once all data had been collected at a national level.

 

The exception to this was TP09 (Satisfied with their landlords’ approaches to complaints handling), which was still in the median quartile. The Service Director confirmed that this measure was an area of key focus for the Housing Service, who would be working with the Corporate team to ensure that this satisfaction measure could be improved in 2026-27.

 

The third column on the table represented the 2025-26 survey outcome, where some areas had been marked in red as they had slightly dipped in comparison to the 2024-25 figures, but were still benchmarking in the upper quartile against other local authorities and housing associations.

 

The Service Director reported that the council had increased the percentage of properties that met the Housing Regulators’ Decent Homes Standard to 95.17%. The Service Director explained that the remaining 4.83% of homes that had not met the standard equated to 855 homes within the council’s portfolio. There were a number of reasons why these homes had not met the standard, including work currently being carried out and difficulties in obtaining access to the properties.

 

The council had set a target of achieving EPC C-rating on 100% of its housing stock by 2030. The Service Director reported that at the end of 2025-26, the level of council homes with at least EPC C-rating had reached 61.6% and funding had been set aside within the HRA to meet this target and maximise opportunities to progress the Warm Homes Programme.

 

With regard to the transactional and compliance Building Safety Measures which were also reported to the Housing Regulator, the Service Director confirmed that the council had achieved 100% compliance rates in 2025-26 on the following:- fire risk assessments; asbestos management surveys and inspections; legionella risk assessments; and communal lift safety checks. For gas safety checks, the council had 99.9% compliance, This equated 13 non-compliant properties of which 6 had appointments scheduled so and

7 properties had not provided access so a court process was underway to gain access to ensure that these properties were safe.

 

The Service Director explained to Members that the council had secured £8.8 million of funding via the government's Warm Homes Programme, which would assist in bringing approximately 950 properties up to EPC C-rating. The Housing team had been working closely with SYMCA, as it was understood that monies that had been previously distributed to local authorities by the government directly could in future be devolved and distributed regionally. It was hoped that future funding would enable the council to deliver energy-efficiency measures cross-tenure.

 

Priority 3 – Preventing homelessness and supporting our residents to live independently

 

Preventing homelessness and supporting residents to live independently had been an area of key focus for the Housing team in 2025-26. It was explained that significant investment had been provided to improve and increase the caretaking offer within the borough, and to provide an environmental improvement initiative in certain areas of some housing estates.

 

A new Homelessness Prevention Strategy had been approved and an Action Plan under this was being developed. Delivery under this Strategy would require full system approach with key partners and stakeholders to tackle homelessness and ensure that a clear prevention pathway was in place.

 

The Service Director outlined that in 2025-26, 3,509 people had approached the Housing Options team for help, and the council owed a duty of care to over 1,900 of those people. There were currently 173 temporary accommodation units, and the aim was to try and reduce that figure over time and continue to reduce hotel usage. The Service Director highlighted the recent development at Castle View in Canklow, which was a joint project with the Adult Social Care team, as an example of where the council had supported residents to live more independently. A range of different properties and units had been developed at this site, which demonstrated how the council was using its evidence base and information on needs requirements to ensure that the right kind of properties were developed. It was hoped this approach would keep people in their homes for longer and ensure that housing became an enabler rather than a disabler.

 

As part of its Housing Acquisitions Programme, the council had looked to acquire accommodation to meet specific need, such as larger family accommodation, smaller one-bedroom properties and properties that could be adapted to meet those with specific needs.

 

Priority 4 – Ensuring that our neighbourhoods are safe, happy and thriving

 

As part of the work to ensure that neighbourhoods were safe, happy and thriving, investment of £1.9 million had been allocated through the HRA budget. Examples were provided of work which had been undertaken to improve the caretaking service and environmental improvement works, such as additional pavements at St Mary’s in Munsborough.

 

The Service Director confirmed that there had been a focus on anti-social behaviour (ASB) during 2025-26, which had been a key area of concern when IPSC had been consulted on the Housing Strategy in autumn 2025. In 2026-27, the Housing team would be implementing a new NEC council housing system, which would be utilised to track and progress ASB cases more easily. Training had been procured for all staff on the new system, including colleagues within the Community Protection Unit, who worked closely with the Housing team in dealing with ASB. As part of the Housing Transformation Programme, it was key to ensure that there was a smooth pathway in place to accelerate ASB cases, with one key point of contact in place for each case.

 

It was reported that the council continued to work on bringing empty homes back to use, with a proactive Empty Homes Officer in place. A case study example was provided to Members of an empty, privately-owned property in Swinton which was purchased by Action Housing, a supported housing provider, who worked to convert the property into four one-bedroom affordable, supported living homes for young adults with learning disabilities. This case study demonstrated how the Housing team had worked with partners and stakeholders to deliver improved housing for residents in need, fulfilling all priorities under the Strategy.

 

Looking forward to 2026-27, the Service Director confirmed that meeting the target of 1,000 new council homes by summer 2027 remained a key focus, and that a further 150 homes were due to be delivered within the financial year 2026-27. With regard to the government’s new homes target for the borough, a Housing Growth Framework was being developed, and the Housing team would continue to work with developers to ensure that there was a pipeline of development sites coming forward. 

 

With regard to existing housing stock, a programme of stock condition surveys would continue and inform longer-term investment plans for council houses. An options piece of work would be carried out on the future of the council’s repairs and maintenance contract, as the current one was due to come to an end in 2030. It was planned that a report would be brought to Cabinet in Spring 2027 outlining the options available. Collaborative work would be undertaken with tenants to understand what was important to them with regard to repairs and maintenance.

 

The Service Director confirmed that a Strategic Housing Market Assessment would be carried out to provide an updated picture of the housing need requirements across the borough, from both a general needs and a supported needs perspective. A Supported Housing Strategy was also being developed to inform plans for future specialist and supported accommodation.

 

An Energy Crisis Fund had been made available over the last quarter of 2025-26. The council had made a commitment to deliver this kind of funding all year round and as a result, the Crisis Resilience Fund had been recently launched. The Service Director reported that the council had already helped 353 people to make claims, with almost £50,000 allocated.

 

The Service Director reminded Members that the Housing team was in the middle of a transformation programme, with the aim of ensuring that the council had a fit for purpose service which would deliver against the Housing Strategy and fulfil the goal of being the best council housing provider. As part of this, the Housing team wished to work more closely with tenants to ensure that exemplar status from the Tenant Participation Advisory Service (TPAS) could be secured.

 

The Chair thanked officers for the report and presentation and invited Members of IPSC to raise questions and queries on the Housing Strategy 2025-30 Progress Report Year 1 (2025-26), and in the ensuing question and answer session the following points were raised:-

 

Councillor Bennett-Sylvester asked a question around the issue of under-occupancy across the council housing portfolio. For example, where there were large family homes occupied by only one or two people who would be better suited to a bungalow or retirement accommodation but there was no incentive for them to move. Councillor Bennett-Sylvester asked whether the council planned to tackle the issue of under-occupancy across council housing by creating more quality retirement accommodation or accommodation better suited for people with disabilities.

 

In response, the Service Director acknowledged that developers often got things wrong and did not necessarily build what residents needed. For example, bungalows were popular but not a favourite of developers due to the “land hungry” nature of them. More money could be made by developers from building flats or smaller properties on the same site.

 

The Service Director confirmed that in the next tranche of the council’s own build programme, there would be a further 500 homes coming forward and a Strategic Market Assessment would be carried out to fully understand what residents want and need from council housing. The market would not deliver everything so it would be the council’s job to use the evidence base to fill in the gaps in housing need.

 

Further, the Service Director explained that the new Housing Allocations Policy was stricter and would not allow people to bid on properties that were larger than their need.

There needed to be incentives in place to encourage people to downsize and accommodation available that was attractive enough for people to make the decision to move before it became a crisis situation.

 

The Service Director commented that when building homes, the council and housing associations needed to lead the way and show developers what residents actually needed to enable them to stay in houses longer-term. For example, factoring in easier adaptations at build stage that would save money later on, such as plumbing in place for level access showers, larger toilet arrangements and accessible and manageable garden space.

 

In a supplementary question, Councillor Bennett-Sylvester asked about the distribution of workload between Housing Officers and whether there was enough support for them to have sufficient staff on the ground getting to know an area and its residents deeply, given that they were the first port of call for residents.

 

In response, the Service Director explained that the Housing transformation programme referred to earlier, would involve a review of Housing Management teams and agreements that were in place with the Neighbourhoods teams to deliver additional resources to support, via the HRA.

 

The Service Director commented that the role of the Housing Officer had changed significantly in recent years, with a lot of time now taken up with dealing with ASB and a small percentage of residents. A lot of other local authorities had started to separate ASB from the Housing Officer’s role in order to provide a more streamlined service. If ASB issues could be escalated to a separate team this would free up the Housing Officer’s time and enable them to be more visible and spend more time on day-to-day issues on their estates, whilst preserving trust and rapport with residents.

 

With regard to tracking ASB, the Chair asked whether with improved tracking systems, service anticipated a spike in homelessness figures where repeat offenders had run out of chances with the council and had effectively become homeless due to persistent ASB.

 

In response, the Service Director commented that there needed to be a balance between supporting people to sustain their tenancies but also taking enforcement action against those who persistently breached their tenancy agreements. Residents who had reported ASB needed to be assured that action would be taken in order to have faith in the system.

 

However, the Service Director was keen to stress that any council tenants who were evicted due to ASB would continue to be given support by the council in seeking alternative accommodation via the Homeless team. Whilst there may be an increase in homelessness due to enforcement in ASB issues, the Housing team was also proud of the levels of tenant sustainability and also of the support available to try and prevent homelessness, which would always be a last resort.

 

Councillor Steele commented that it would be difficult to manage the situation if Housing Officers were asked to dedicate more time to dealing with ASB, particularly given that many estates now had a mix of council tenants and homeowners. The Service Director clarified that service would actually be looking to take the pressure of dealing with ASB away from Housing Officers. Service was looking at working more closely with the CPU team, who currently took on escalated ASB issues, to form a combined team of specialist delivery. This would provide consistency in contact and reporting mechanisms for residents.

 

The Service Director commented that enhanced cross-directorate working would be required to ensure that the right resources were in the right places to tackle ASB and that HRA money was spent appropriately to support both council and private tenants and homeowners on estates.

 

Councillor Steele commented that they had seen the difference that could be made on an estate when a good Housing Manager and a good Neighbourhood Coordinator worked together. However, this could be a difficult balance and in a further question, Councillor Steele asked how cross-directorate working would be built in and encouraged when dealing with ASB. 

 

The Service Director responded, commenting that a clear joint policy and pathway would be key, with good understanding of the processes, the escalation routes and the enforcement options. If the ASB process was streamlined, with a dedicated team looking after it, this would free up Housing Management teams to undertake work on building relationships with residents on the ground. The Housing team were working closely with the Service Director of Community Safety & Street Scene and the CPU team to understand how to create a dedicated, cross-tenure resource to ensure that the council had one, consistent approach to ASB.

 

The Chair asked whether there was a clear exit plan in place to reduce reliance on hotel use as temporary accommodation. Whilst the figures for hotel use had decreased, it still remained high.

 

The Service Director responded, stating that the number of temporary accommodation units had increased to try and avoid having to use hotels. However, service also needed to be mindful of the amount of time people were staying in this “temporary” accommodation. One of the delivery plan targets for the year ahead was to ensure that nobody stayed in temporary accommodation for longer than six months. Otherwise, the knock-on effect was that other people could become homeless due to the unavailability of temporary accommodation.

 

The Service Director confirmed that a current focus was to address those that had been in temporary accommodation for longer periods of time and free up the accommodation that had been unavailable which in turn, should reduce hotel usage. Last year, there had been 6,000 days’ worth of hotel stays used across the council’s Rough Sleeper initiative The council would also need to make sure that there were enough decant properties available – for example, in emergency situations such as fire – so that these residents were not moved into hotels.

 

In a supplementary question, the Chair commented that residents had complained when the same houses were consistently used as temporary accommodation as neighbours bear the brunt of the constant change of people living in them. The Chair enquired whether there was any plan to address this and consider rotating the use of properties as temporary council accommodation.

 

The Service Director confirmed that the temporary accommodation was well dispersed across the borough but acknowledged that where there had been specific issues, the council had taken property back or had looked to reallocate individuals who had been in the property for a longer period of time.

 

The Housing team intended to significantly reduce the current 173 temporary accommodation units down to a more manageable level as a full-time job member of staff was required to manage these properties, whereas the focus should be moving people on to something more permanent. 

 

Councillor Jones commented that he agreed that it would be appropriate to have a separate ASB team. This would help to improve the public perception that when complaints around ASB are reported, they did not get escalated quickly enough.

 

In an additional question, Councillor Jones asked whether under the plans for new house building, any thought had been given to the concept of a “cradle to grave” community, whereby suitable housing stock was provided within the same estate for all stages of life. Councillor Jones mentioned empty and disused areas of land within existing housing estates where bungalows could potentially be built.

 

The Service Director referred again to the planned Housing Needs Assessment and that a survey would be carried out with residents to help the Housing team to understand what residents really want from housing. A review of council-owned garage sites across the borough would also be conducted to ascertain whether any had reached the end of their usable life and the land they sat on could be used for future building. A call for suitable sites for building would also be made as part of the Local Plan process.

 

The Service Director commented that on all housing sites coming forward, the council would try and provide a mix of accommodation types, to try and encourage long-term sustainability to the sites. It was stressed that the council should only look to build what the market hadn’t already. Developers could build larger family accommodation cheaply and the council should fill in the gaps in availability and provide the smaller, adapted and bungalow-type accommodation that developers generally don’t build.

 

Councillor Thorp asked for confirmation as to the process by which properties are identified for energy efficiency works to get them up to EPC C-rating – whether they would be looked at individually or assessed as a block and works carried out regardless.

 

The Service Director explained that a programme of stock condition surveys was currently underway on all council properties, with approximately 6,500 carried out in the last year. As part of these surveys, an EPC assessment would be carried out routinely which would identify areas where properties needed work to bring them up to EPC C-rating. Around 61% of housing stock was currently at EPC C-rating. The council had £8.8 million of funding available under the Warm Homes Scheme to assist with energy efficiency improvements. The surveys would also identify where there were opportunities to future-proof properties, such as by adding external wall insulation.

 

The Service Director explained that the council had to report to the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) under the Warm Homes Programme on the works that had been carried out on each property. An assessment would be carried out at the start and the end of any retrofit by a qualified assessor.

 

In a follow-on question, Councillor Thorp asked whether reports that the council was removing all gas fires from properties were accurate. The Service Director confirmed that gas fires may have been removed from certain properties if they needed to be upgraded and that any new build properties could no longer be built with gas fires in. It was a government requirement to build with more sustainable energy options, such as air source heat pumps and solar panels. There was no active programme to remove all gas fires and, in some circumstances, gas boilers were being replaced as part of the Decent Homes Programme. 

 

Councillor Jackson asked in relation to Priority 3 (Preventing homelessness and supporting our residents to live independently) whether there had been discussions with NHS partners and social care regarding the shortage of adapted properties and the cost implications of providing additional care, particularly for people with acute brain injuries.

 

The Service Director explained that the needs assessment previously referred to, would incorporate the requirements of support and specialist care and that the government had asked councils to produce a Supported Housing Strategy, on which the Housing team would work with Adult Social Care to develop.

 

The Service Director confirmed that the Housing team worked closely with Occupational Health and Adult Social care to try and match specific needs to specific properties and would look for properties suitable for adaptation when looking to acquire properties from the market. It was acknowledged, however, that there could always be more work done between services to support residents with specific needs.

 

The Chair asked for more information on future plans for the Repairs & Maintenance contract, which was due for renewal, and whether the council had considered bringing the service back in-house rather than outsourcing it.

 

The Service Director explained that a report had gone to Cabinet in 2025 that took the decision to extend the current contract with external providers to 2030. However, a review of future options was currently ongoing. The council had engaged an external company, Lumensol, who were specialists in this sector, to assist with this work and engagement with tenants was underway to understand what was important to them with regard to repairs and maintenance. It was hoped that a report would go to Cabinet in Spring 2027, setting out all of the possible options, one of which could be bringing the work back within the council.

 

Councillor Bennett-Sylvester referred to the issues around under-occupancy of council properties discussed earlier in the meeting and asked IPSC Members to consider making a recommendation asking for a service to provide an update, following the first year of the new Housing Allocation Policy, on whether there had been any impact on levels of under-occupancy. The Chair asked Members to vote on this proposed additional recommendation, and it was approved.

 

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

 

Resolved:-

 

1)    That the progress made in delivering the priorities and actions set out in Rotherham’s Housing Strategy 2025-30 be noted;

 

2)    That IPSC agrees to continue to receive annual Housing Strategy Progress Reports;

 

3)    That IPSC agrees that future Housing Strategy Progress Reports will be reported to the Improving Places Select Commission in September each year, to ensure that all data is available (for the reasons set out in Section 1.5 of the Report); and

 

As a further recommendation, the Improving Places Select Commission requested:-

4)    That an update be provided to IPSC in 6-12 months' time regarding the issue of under-occupancy in council-owned properties and whether implementation of the new Housing Allocations Policy has had an impact on levels of under occupancy.

 

(Councillor Bennett-Sylvester declared an interest in Minute No.7 (Housing Strategy 2025-2030 Progress Report Year 1 (2025-26)) on the grounds that they are a council tenant.)