Agenda item

 

To receive and consider the report and presentation which provide an introduction to the Housing Improvement and Governance team, which was created in February 2025 in response to the Social Housing (Regulation) Act 2023. 

 

 

At the Chair’s invitation, Councillor Beresford, Cabinet Member for Housing (Cabinet Member), introduced the item and explained that the Housing Improvement and Governance Team (HIG) had been created in response to the regulatory requirements introduced by the Social Housing (Regulation) Act 2023.

 

The aim of HIG was to ensure that the Council  monitored and complied with the statutory Consumer Standards. This activity would be reported into the Housing Regulation Assurance Board (HRAB).

 

Louise Robson, Head of Service for Housing Improvement and Governance (Head of HIG) took Members through the presentation accompanying the report, highlighting the following points:

 

• HIG had been established by the Council following the implementation of the new Social Housing (Regulation) Act 2023 (Act), which made the provision of social housing a “regulated” service following the tragic events of the Grenfell Tower fire in 2017.

 

• This meant that all social housing providers would be subject to an inspection by the Regulator of Social Housing every four years, with the Council’s Housing Service due its first  inspection under this regime within the next 12-18 months. Once inspected, the Council would receive a grading between C1 to C4, where C1 would be the top grading and a grading of C4 would require significant improvements to be made.

 

• Five Consumer Standards had been introduced under the Act:

1.    Safety and Quality;

2.    Transparency, Influence and Accountability;

3.    Neighbourhood and Community;

4.    Tenancy; and

5.    Competence and Conduct (in force from October 2026)

 

There was also the Rent standard, which ensured that the Council was charging tenants the correct level of rent.

 

• Alongside evidence required to demonstrate compliance with the Consumer Standards, the Council was required to conduct an annual tenant satisfaction survey, abbreviated as TSMs (Tenant Satisfaction Measures). The Council’s tenants were asked how satisfied they were with Housing services provided and how well the Council handled any complaints.

 

• The Inspector would consider how well the Council had complied with the Housing Ombudsman’s Handling of Complaints Code, alongside compliance with response times for urgent maintenance issues under Awaab’s Law.

 

• It was explained that the majority of the functions within HIG were already in existence, but that they had been fragmented under different Heads of Service. This had not been conducive to the best experience for tenants and staff and meant that there had been no clear accountability for ensuring compliance with the new regulations.

 

• HIG would sit alongside the existing teams within Housing Services - Repairs & Maintenance, Asset Management, Housing Estate Services, Housing Income and Allocations – and would ensure that processes were streamlined to deliver the best service for tenants, whilst meeting the regulatory requirements.

 

• The tenant journey, from initially accessing Housing services to moving into their home and living well in that home, was of paramount importance. This journey could be improved by a “one team” approach with more coordinated, efficient and accessible systems.

 

• The functions of the four different teams that sat under the HIG umbrella were summarised as follows:

 

1.    Governance

The Governance Team would be responsible for coordinating compliance with the Consumer Standards and would provide the link to the Regulator of Social Housing. The Governance team would also provide assurance to senior staff and the Cabinet Member via reports delivered to the HRAB, which was chaired by the Chief Executive.

 

Examples were provided of how the HRAB provided valuable challenge to the Housing service, such as requests to run an independent mock inspection, to initiate a review of complaints handling and to accelerate additional resources to key areas such as compliance.

 

The Governance Team were tasked with coordinating the Council’s “readiness” for the impending inspection by ensuring that all required documentation was in place and uploaded to the relevant system.

 

2.    Business Development

The Business Development Team would be responsible for service planning and policy and strategy development and would listen to the voice of tenants and feed that into areas where improvements were required.

 

An example of how this had worked in practice was provided, where a more coordinated policy for accessing tenant’s properties had been put in place across Housing services. This had resulted from feedback from tenants and staff that the previous process had been inconsistent.

 

This team would also be responsible for the analysis of feedback from the TSMs and provided monthly updates on tenant feedback which fed directly into service improvements. This work enabled the Council to fully understand who their tenants were and how services could be tailored to help them live comfortably in their homes.

 

3.    Programme Management

This team would work closely with the Business Development team. It was explained that a Diverse Needs Programme had recently been introduced, which aimed to improve ways in which the Housing Management System stored and could record key information from interactions with tenants. For example, if a tenant informed service of mobility issues, this would be noted on the system and flagged up with any contractors due to visit the property. A new CRM system had also been set up to provide a more holistic view of tenants and their needs.

 

4.    Housing Transformation

The Housing Transformation Programme sat within HIG and was a two-year initiative designed to fundamentally shape the way in which Rotherham delivered Housing services. The ambition was to be a “best in class” social housing landlord and to achieve a C1 or C2 rating when inspected.

 

It was reported that the Transformation Programme was being delivered in response to increasing pressure on the regulatory landscape. In addition, a number of internal reviews had been recently undertaken which had highlighted the importance of ensuring that Housing was primarily an enabling service for tenants, helping them to live happily and for longer in their homes

 

The Housing Transformation Programme sought to create greater consistency across organisational structures, including team sizing and grading arrangements. This would ensure that the Housing service had the right range of employees equipped with the relevant skills and knowledge and the best and most efficient use of resources to deliver excellent customer service and value for money for tenants.

 

• It was explained that tenant engagement was key to the HIG team and that meaningful engagement opportunities were offered to tenants to help shape the way in which Housing services were delivered. The Council had a “Connectors Pool” of approximately 200 tenants who were unable to attend regular focus groups and panels but would engage on specific topics and respond to surveys. The Housing Improvement Panel looked at performance, and the Tenant Scrutiny Panel scrutinised different areas of the Housing service.

 

• A “Tenant Screen Team” was also in place which checked the accessibility of the language and images used in the Housing teams’ communications with tenants.  This included new policy documents, online communications and checking the  magazine which was sent out to tenants every three months. A quarterly tenant engagement round up was also produced and sent to all tenants and made available online.

 

• Examples of where tenant engagement had shaped delivery were provided, such as: the co -creation of a new Tenant Engagement Framework; consultation on policies and strategies; and the design of a Housing Performance scorecard which was displayed on the Council website.

 

• The Tenant Scrutiny Panel had recently carried out an internal review, in conjunction with the Tenant Participation Advisory Service (TPAS). One issue which had been identified by this review was that the timing of the reports on Tenant Scrutiny activity to IPSC was not ideal. It had been proposed that Tenant Scrutiny report to IPSC every six months and provide a retrospective review on actions implemented, without waiting until they had all been completed. This had been agreed with senior leadership and the Chair of IPSC.

 

• Following a recent assessment, the Council had received TPAS exemplar accreditation. This was a nationally recognised accreditation and was only awarded to organisations that demonstrated the highest standard of tenant engagement and a strong commitment to involving tenants in shaping services. It was reported that there were only five other local authorities that had achieved this accreditation and that the Housing team was very proud of this accolade.

 

The Chair thanked Officers for the report and presentation and invited Members of IPSC to raise questions and queries on the item and in the ensuing question and answer session the following points were raised:-

 

Councillor Duncan referred to the significant amount of responsive repairs and maintenance work that was outsourced by the Housing service and carried out by contractors. Councillor Duncan asked how the introduction of stronger regulations had impacted on arrangements with contractors. Had KPIs under contracts been adjusted and would this impact on how the Council looked to outsource these services in the future?

 

Sarah Clyde, the Service Director for Housing (Service Director), confirmed that the increased regulatory requirements had impacted on the Council’s repairs and maintenance contracts with Mears and Equans. It had been necessary to bring in additional resource to ensure that the requirement to complete emergency works within the 24-hour turnaround period set out under Awaab’s Law were met. With Phase 2 of Awaab’s Law due to come into force in October 2026, the Council continued to work closely with contractors to make necessary adjustments to existing contractual arrangements. It was reported that Mears and Equans had been very flexible in their approach to this.

 

The Service Director referred to the Consumer Standard of Competence and Conduct and explained that the Housing service was looking to develop a Code of Practice which would sit underneath the Council's Code of Conduct for staff, and would be extended to cover external stakeholders, such as contractors. This Code of Practice would set out qualification expectations which would be routinely checked and verified.

 

The Service Director informed Members that the Council’s repairs and maintenance contract would be up for renewal within the next couple of years and work was ongoing with external and internal stakeholders to consider options for the future of repairs and maintenance within the Housing service.

 

In a supplementary question, Councillor Duncan asked what the financial impact had been of the additional resource requirements referred to. The Service Director explained that under Awaab’s Law, any urgent gas repairs needed to be completed within a 24-hour time period. Previously, the contractual arrangements had been that works were to be carried out by the end of the following day. It had therefore been necessary to work with contractors to increase the amount of resource available to meet these statutory timescales. Three additional gas fitters had been recruited, and the Council would cover the cost of this, as per the terms of the contract.

 

Where repairs were required to be done within a five-day timescale, that work and expense would be covered under the “price per property” arrangements in place with the contractors. The Service Director commented that the Council received quite a lot of social value under the repairs and maintenance contracts as the contractors worked closely with Housing colleagues on awareness campaigns around damp and mould. The contractors would be working with tenants around keeping their homes warm and preventing damp and mould issues as winter approached.

 

Councillor Thorp asked whether the new staffing structure that had been established represented a duplication of any existing roles and whether it had created another layer of management. Councillor Thorp asked for assurance that the four different teams under the HIG umbrella would feed into each other effectively.

 

The Service Director clarified that HIG was not a support function but represented a function in its own right as there had not previously been a team which had overseen Housing governance and regulation. HIG would enable the Housing service to meet its regulatory requirements and would work very closely with senior management and all seven Heads of Service within Housing. The HIG team would be able to carry out work that the frontline operational staff across the Housing service would not have the time or resource to do and could develop and deliver projects and programmes from the information and intelligence provided by the specialist operational staff.

 

The Service Director explained that the HIG team had been integral to the recent improvement work to core functions within the Housing service, such as the new CRM system, a new Corporate Complaints policy and process and essential planning for Phase 2 of Awaab’s Law. The HIG team had enabled the Housing service to better identify its strengths and weaknesses and put in place Action Plans to move the service forward.

 

In a follow-on question, Councillor Thorp commented that the structure appeared to be very management heavy and asked whether this stronger tier of management would put an end to some tenants’ reported experience of conflicting information being provided by different Council teams and departments. 

 

The Service Director explained that the Housing Transformation Programme should iron out any such discrepancies. Part of the programme would be to strip the customer journey and experience back in order to better understand where there were any gaps in early intervention and prevention and where additional resources could be required. There would be improved consistency in processes and procedures to avoid confusing situations for tenants.

 

Work on a number of the key priorities under the Council’s Housing Strategy, with the support of HIG, would enable Housing Management Officers to concentrate on their core function of being visible on the ground and providing crucial support to tenants. Work on the Housing Transformation Programme was a huge task but was reported to be well underway. The Service Director expressed the opinion that HIG was an integral and crucial part of the management structure that would support and enable this transformation, for the benefit of Rotherham council tenants.

 

The Chair enquired whether the staff set out in the HIG Staff Structure chart (at page 62 of the Agenda Pack) were existing Council Officers or had been recruited to create the new team.

 

The Service Director confirmed that it was a mix, with a new Head of Service but a number of staff within the HIG team who were already working on other projects within the Council, such as the NEC IT system for Housing. Significant effort had been made to bring the right people together with the right skills to provide more coordinated ways of working and links to other service areas in the Council.

 

Councillor Bennett-Sylvester commented that the increased level of regulation in the social housing sector was a welcome development and, in response to Councillor Thorp’s earlier questions, expressed the view HIG appeared to be achieving success in getting teams working together more effectively.

 

Councillor Bennett-Sylvester asked a question around tenant participation and how the Council ensured that the pool of Tenant Connectors was representative of tenants from more deprived areas of the borough where less volunteers usually came forward. 

 

The Head of HIG agreed that more work needed to be done to increase engagement from tenants within Rotherham’s more deprived communities. The tenants had also identified this weakness themselves in the development of the Tenant Engagement Framework. It was confirmed that work would be undertaken with the Neighbourhoods team to understand what the barriers to engagement were and information from the Tenant Connectors would help to identify gaps in tenant representation. The Housing service intended to develop more localised events and had recently run a trial tenant involvement event in Dinnington, with mixed results, as it was the already engaged tenants who had attended.

 

In a supplementary question, Councillor Bennett-Sylvester enquired how the Council would ensure that there was sufficient “critical friend” challenge on the HRAB. The Head of HIG confirmed that the current “critical friend” on the HRAB was the Cabinet Member. However, it had recently been recommended that two further members should be co-opted onto the HRAB, one a tenant member and one an independent member, to broaden the range and depth of knowledge and experience on the Board.

 

Councillor Bennett-Sylvester further asked whether the Council had scope to tailor the Consumer Standards to the borough’s needs and requirements or whether the Act was prescriptive on what the Standards must cover. Councillor Bennett-Sylvester gave the example of increased maintenance of green spaces and use of play areas within housing estates to encourage exercise and use of play areas to tackle health inequalities.

 

The Service Director confirmed that the Regulator of Social Housing was not prescriptive on how the Council met the Consumer Standards but would require comprehensive evidence and assurance that standards around safety and quality were being met. The Service Director was confident that the Council could demonstrate that it had a good relationship with its tenants, understood them and cared about their welfare. The fact that the Chief Executive and the Cabinet Member sat on the HRAB showed that this was embedded at the highest levels of the Council.

 

The Service Director explained that due to the diverse demographic across Rotherham, it would be possible to focus on certain aspects of support in different areas, dependent on the needs of residents. For example, the Crisis Support Fund and support around fuel poverty. The Council was in the middle of a comprehensive stock condition survey which would provide crucial intelligence to prioritise where council-owned housing required improvements. Each local authority would take a different approach to the Consumer Standards, but all would need to meet the Regulator’s expected outcomes and demonstrate that the voice of the tenant was being listened to.

 

Councillor Steele praised Officers for the content of the report and presentation and commented that they had been clear in setting out the aims and aspirations of HIG, whilst acknowledging where further development and progress would be made.

 

The Chair commented that there were a number of other Housing Associations within Rotherham and asked whether the Council was required to link up to these external housing providers. 

 

The Service Director confirmed that all sufficiently sized registered social housing providers would be subject to the new requirements and could expect an inspection from the Regulator of Social Housing. The Housing arm of Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council (Berneslai Homes, an arm’s length organization (ALMO)) went through the inspection process a couple of years ago and Doncaster City Council (also an ALMO) was due to be inspected imminently.

 

The Service Director expressed the view that Rotherham was in a position of strength to work with stakeholders and partners, as Housing services sat within the local authority, with established ways of working across the Council and external stakeholders.  For other registered housing providers or ALMOs, it could prove more difficult to make those connections. It was reported that a Strategic Housing Forum was in place that met quarterly and brought all local Rotherham housing providers together to discuss issues and share experience and know-how. Networking also took place with colleagues at neighbouring local authorities.

 

In a follow-on question, Councillor Duncan made the observation that some of the other registered social housing providers were quite small in size and the increased regulatory requirements could be overwhelming for them. As these housing providers were also responsible for providing safe homes for Rotherham residents, was the Council, as a much larger organisation, required to provide support to them to fulfil their statutory obligations.

 

The Service Director explained that there was a threshold under the Act, and that if a registered housing provider had less than 1,000 homes, it would not be subject to the same rigorous inspection process but would be expected to work with the Regulator in other ways. A number of Housing Associations in Rotherham worked on a national footprint so had more resources available to them.

 

The Service Director confirmed that the Council was committed to working closely with local partners as a key priority under the Housing Strategy. This was essential to ensure that the Council could deliver enough social and affordable housing across the borough to meet the needs of residents. This would inevitably involve working with other registered housing providers and attracting new ones to consider building within Rotherham.

 

The Service Director confirmed that the Housing teams also worked closely with the Housing Directors at SYMCA to share best practice and collaborate in submitting funding bids through the National Housing Development Programme and Homes England. It was key that housing providers across South Yorkshire worked together to ensure that there was sufficient and sustainable housing available in the areas people wanted to live.

 

The Chair asked Members to approve the recommendations set out within the report and set out a further recommendation that service provide a brief summary of the work of HIG in each Annual Report presented to IPSC on progress under the Housing Strategy. Members agreed to this additional recommendation.

 

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

 

Resolved:-

 

1)    That the contents of the report and presentation be noted;

 

2)    That IPSC agrees to the proposed changes to reporting arrangements for Tenancy Scrutiny reports; and

 

3)    That IPSC requests that a section be included in each annual Housing Strategy Update Report to IPSC summarising the work of the HIG and the HRAB and how they have contributed to delivery under the Strategy and the Housing Transformation plan.

 

 

 

Councillor Bennett-Sylvester declared an interest in Minute No.16 (Introducing Housing Involvement and Governance) on the grounds that they are a council tenant.