Report from

Outcomes from customer scrutiny

CIH Lunch and Learn Event 23rd May 2013

By Mark Soundie Independent Community, Housing and Tenant advisor The event was facilitated by staff from Broadacres Housing Association who also produced this report.

Page | 1

Contents

Introduction Commentary Appendix 1. Agenda Appendix 2, Peter Donegan, presentation Appendix 3. Mark Soundie, Presentation Appendix 4. Notes from workshop Appendix 5. Organisations who attended Appendix 6. Contact details

Page 3 Page 4 Page 7 Page 8 Page 29 Page 37 Page 44 Page 45

Page | 2

Introduction
Each year the North East Branch of the Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) hosts up to 6 free Lunch and Learn sessions, which are aimed at CIH members and non-members alike. The sessions are an opportunity to share and discuss the good practice which takes place across the region as well as providing an opportunity to network with like-minded individuals. This was the first time a session was held which was specifically aimed at customers/residents/tenants who are involved in the scrutiny function with their landlord as well as those staff who support them. Over 120 delegates from over 20 different organisations, heard Peter Donegan, Resident Involvement Strategy Manager from Riverside Housing, talk about their role as co-regulation champions and how they have approached the challenge of delivering scrutiny throughout Riverside. (Peters presentation is in Appendix 2)

Peter Donegan chats with one of the delegates

Page | 3

Mark Soundie, an Independent Community, Housing and Tenant Advisor, then led a workshop session looking at the outcomes from customer/resident/tenant Scrutiny. (Marks presentation is in Appendix 3)

Mark Soundie watches on as delegates debate key issues

During the session delegates worked in groups to look at how the value of scrutiny is captured in their organisation. Some were new to scrutiny, some had just started the process and others had completed several scrutiny exercises. (Notes from this session are in Appendix 4) I thank all those who attended for their hard work and for approaching this challenge in a positive way and for the quality of their responses.

Page | 4

Commentary Delegates, made it clear that they really valued the scrutiny experience, and that they believed the success of scrutiny depends upon; Everyone being truthful Strong relationships Tenant and organisation understanding and buy in Investment in the development of the panel and supporting staff Common sense Recognition of the value of scrutiny Strong relationships between scrutiny panel, staff and the board.

Everyone agreed that capturing the outcomes and value of scrutiny is a far greater task than reporting outputs. One of the challenges from this session was that each organisation had developed their own scrutiny model. Although the approaches to the actual scrutiny were different, delegates agreed that the capturing of outcomes would benefit from a common approach. These are some of the common themes; It became clear that it would be very difficult to just report outcomes and that a good report would have to contain supporting output information to make the information about outcomes work. That a companywide approach to capturing outcomes would be needed That some outcomes can take a long time before they become apparent and that a long term impact/outcome assessment. That scrutiny panels may need to revisit services at a later date to see if the changes are working. That general satisfaction surveys would not be specific enough and that information would have to be gathered about scrutinised services in a new way.

As an example table 4 came up with these outcomes; Increased confidence Liberating Reduced isolation Social skills built up/ self esteem Adding value to something/ valuable contribution Increased knowledge of business environment
Page | 5

Training courses Stepping stone to employment wider aim of many housing organisations Scrutiny has given opportunities to challenge landlord and be part of improvement process.

In conclusion; delegates left the session in a positive mood, with the intention of looking at how they will capture and report the outcomes of their scrutiny exercises

Page | 6

Appendix 1. Agenda
12.30 1.15 1.20 2.00 2.10 3.00 3.15 Lunch Introductions and housekeeping Peter Donegan, Resident Involvement Manager, Riverside Housing Q&A Mark Soundie, Independent Community, Housing and Tenant Advisor. Measuring the value of scrutiny Workshop How is customer scrutiny making a difference Feedback and conclusions Close

Page | 7

Appendix 2. Peter Donegan, Presentation

Co-Regulation &Scrutiny in Riverside

Peter Donegan Resident Involvement
Strategy Manager

Page | 8

Context
National organisation managing over 50,000 homes from Scotland to the south east. We have a strong background in resident involvement with tenants on our Boards for more than 25 years. Took the opportunity to review our structures 3 years ago and began a process of implementation We have come up with a structure which operates at a national level and which also operates at a local level. Structure means that we have active tenant engagement at all levels within the organisation. Works for us but may not work for everyone

Page | 9

Co-regulation Champions
Why TSA recognised being a national organisation poses its problems in terms of coming up with structures which will work in all parts of the country, with all types of customer bases. Felt our structure and journey might be useful for other complex organisations We have learnt a lot! Our model wont work for everyone but hopefully should give ideas and tips for those undertaking a similar journey.

Page | 10

Our events
4 study visits consisting of presentations and workshops, with a chance to meet actively involved individuals and groups from a variety of areas, all tenant led
1st focused on Netherley area of Liverpool delivery of whole area regeneration post stock transfer 2nd focused around supported services to young people in the Cambridge and Ipswich areas 3rd focused on the Anfield area of Liverpool where we are piloting our older persons services hub concept (Livetime) 4th focused on supported services and general needs customers in the Southeast our traditionally poorest performing area.

Page | 11

Co-regulation Champions What next

Evaluation report and case studies available on the Centre for Public Scrutiny web-site http://www.cfps.org.uk/publications?item=7043&offset=0 Website launched to share best practice https://sites.google.com/site/coregulationchampions/home Continuing to work together and support each other Supporting the TPAS Tenant Central programme

Page | 12

Our Scrutiny Journey Longstanding relationship of constructive challenge between Riverside and its tenants Review of scrutiny 2011 revealed Service Quality Group overburdened Three discussions at the Tenant Federation in led to creation of a new scrutiny structure Implementation plans for scrutiny agreed by Housing Services Committee

Page | 13

Implementation Plans
Selecting Tenants -Advertising the opportunities -Carrying out tenancy checks -Matching interests to groups and divisions through local taster sessions -Agreeing the appointments to the groups Federation Officers -Tenant scrutiny training programme Staff training -Introduction to scrutiny -Riversides scrutiny structure -What issues get dealt with where -How to escalate concerns through the scrutiny framework Selecting External Mentor -We wanted the external mentor to ensure that Riverside did not directly influence tenants as they considered the effectiveness of Riversides service delivery -Bring in external independent advice so that Riverside is not too inward looking Tenant training
-Working in meetings -Understanding performance information, written and in charts Understanding the role tenants are being asked to undertake -Knowing what to do with decisions -Where should the outcomes be reported?
Page | 14

Scrutiny Structure

Page | 15

Scrutiny Structure Links To Wider Involvement

Governance Scrutiny Tenants

Page | 16

Scrutiny and resident audit compared

Resident audit asks if it does what it says on the tin Scrutiny asks if it was the right tin in the first place Different but complementary tasks Work best in partnership

Page | 17

Scrutiny and Resident Audit in Practice

Scrutiny Resident Audit

Scrutiny is high level Audit (the TASQ Team) Scrutiny is a continuous focuses on what is happening process on the ground and compares You will meet regularly to that with what is expected or review performance reports, promised discuss Riversides strategies Audits are short and and service plans, and monitor intensive you prepare, take a snapshot of the service, report local offers You will also look in depth at on what you found and then your job is done particular topics Audits require on site work Scrutiny is largely desk-visits to estates/offices based Scrutiny panels will use information from other resident groups

Page | 18

The Changing Room

Oversees scrutiny activity on behalf of our Tenants and Residents Federation, and talks to Riversides Housing Services Committee Its work focuses on: the Tenant Involvement and Empowerment Standard and some aspects of two of the Economic Standards, Value for money Standard (vfm) Governance and financial viability Standard Its other responsibilities include - Communication - Co-regulation in The Riverside Group - Performance against the residents Top Ten performance indicators - Regional trends

Page | 19

Equality and Diversity

This Panel takes as its starting point the diversity provisions of the Tenant Involvement and Empowerment Standard and applies them across all service areas. It is supported by the Riverside Lead Director for E&D and a member of the central Resident Involvement staff, and reports the outcomes of its work to The Changing Room It can commission work from Tenant Inspectors and the TASQ team Its key responsibilities include: Scrutinising the outcomes of the Group-wide diversity work e.g. the work in progress on supporting LGBT residents Commissioning diversity-related work where necessary e.g. looking at mental health issues

Page | 20

Customer Services
This Panel focuses on the Tenancy and Neighbourhood Community Standard plus aspects of the Rent Standard. It is supported by the Riverside Lead Director for Customer Service and a member of the central Resident Involvement staff, and reports the outcomes of its work to The Changing Room It can commission work from Tenant Inspectors and the TASQ team Its key responsibilities include: The impact on tenants of service strategies, business plans and
service delivery methods Regeneration and community development outcomes Impact on tenants and communities of recent changes in response to Government proposals, such as fixed term tenancies and affordable rents Service charges, information and collection methods Rent payment methods; arrears levels; impact of financial inclusion and debt advice measures

Page | 21

Maintenance and Asset Management

This Panel has the Home Standard as its reference point. It is supported by the Riverside Lead Director for Maintenance and a member of the central Resident Involvement staff, and reports the outcomes of its work to The Changing Room It can commission work from Tenant Inspectors and the TASQ team Its key responsibilities include: The various maintenance partnering arrangements, their effectiveness, consistency of service delivery and tenant satisfaction Asset management, including strategies for stock disposals The adaptations service

Page | 22

What is expected of tenants involved in scrutiny

Scrutiny panel members attend regular meetings with senior Riverside staff and Board members to discuss the quality of services delivered to residents. They are expected to: prepare for meetings at home by reading reports that we send attend the training sessions arranged for scrutiny panel members allow around 4 hours a week on average They need to have an attitude which lets them say what help they need and an eagerness to find out why things are as they are. Each scrutiny panel member will meet a Tenants and Residents Federation Officer and a member of Riversides staff each year to review how they have got on

Page | 23

What is expected of staff involved in scrutiny?

Operational staff are asked to attend regular meetings with tenants to discuss the quality of services delivered to residents They need an attitude which lets them listen to what tenants say about the service, without taking it personally so they can find out why tenants are thinking as they are They need to spend time finding performance information and presenting it in a way which is different from the business information we already present They may need to challenge the assumptions tenants have made without sounding like they are challenging the tenants themselves We want to staff to welcome tenants views as a way to improve the service for Riverside

Page | 24

Real tenants, real opinions

Page | 25

So how does it work?

Group decides on area to scrutinise and may commission TASQ or Tenant Inspectors to assist with evidence gathering Group agrees team roles, pulls evidence together (both data and evidence from staff, tenant and contractor interviews) Report is produced with recommendations which are presented to the Changing Room and relevant staff body such as Housing Services Committee. Action plan is produced. Delivery is checked via annual meeting between the Changing Room and Housing Services Committee. Outputs and outcomes tracked. Important for tenants to realise that some of the outcomes are likely to be longer term rather than immediate

Page | 26

So Where Are We Now?

Have just started our first review of scrutiny We have found local panels work better than national ones It has been taken up more staff time than we expected It has been more expensive than planned The demands of the role has meant not all tenants have stayed involved Some tenants have struggled with the role even with training It has sowed its value and has an important role to continue to play Recognise that the existing structure needs some tweaks to get it working better Its a continuous learning process so dont be disheartened if everything doesnt go as you first expect it to!

Page | 27

Question Time?

Page | 28

Appendix 3. Mark Soundie, Presentation

Outcomes from Tenant / Resident / Customer Scrutiny

Mark Soundie Independent Community, Housing and Tenant Advisor

Page | 29

Co -regulation
Meeting the requirements of regulation together Commitment to making it work from tenants and the whole organisation Open and honest dialogue Outcome driven, in a sector more used to outputs More difficult to agree and capture outcomes

Page | 30

Scrutiny
Is different in each organisation Each organisation has its own challenges There is no one model that fits all Some have not started yet 2013 first year of scrutiny awards
well done Coast and Country & East Durham Homes

Page | 31

Scrutiny should
Check we are doing what the policy/ procedure says. Make recommendations when things are found to be failing. Check that the policy is fit for purpose. Make recommendations for new/better ways to deliver the service

Lead to measurable service improvement

Page | 32

Challenges
It may not be possible to implement all of the recommendations. It can take a long time to see the benefit of some changes. It is a big task Keeping people on board Gathering outcome information. Promoting and celebrating success

Page | 33

Workshop
We are all being asked to record outcomes Question How is scrutiny making a difference and how can we capture these outcomes

Page | 34

Feedback & Conclusions

Page | 35

Thank You

Page | 36

Appendix 4. Notes from workshop

Following the 2 presentations delegates were invited to discuss the following workshop questions at their tables; How is scrutiny making a difference and how can we capture these outcomes? Each table had a facilitator / note taker and we have sought to capture the wide range of contributions which were made on the day. How is scrutiny making a difference? Improved services to tenants and has helped staff in their role, making their job easier by providing them with simple solutions. Outcomes we have captured have lead to more efficient ways of working which means more time for operative to do the work. The board are having a dialogue with tenants and are responding to our recommendations. Relationships between board / corporate management and ourselves has improved. Tenants have a growing confidence in the scrutiny panels and there is a greater understanding of how tenants can influence change. Scrutiny has created more opportunities for us to get involved. Works well by recognising the organisations strengths as well as areas for improvement. Better understanding of the role of staff, also more trust and transparency. Has created more joined up working between the different tenant groups in our organisation. Ive learnt new skills and can use those I already have. Simple easy common sense adjustments to services that do make a difference and dont cost a fortune. Outsourcing the adaptations service has led to better VFM. We now have a more efficient service and people are not on the waiting list as long. The review of our lettings and voids service has lead to shorter re-let times and customers are re-housed quicker. You couldnt get through on phone before but the telephone service has now improved. Recommendations to change the gas servicing from every 10 months to every 12 months will result in a cost saving to the organisation as there will be less visits to the customer. You need to target scrutiny in areas that have the biggest impact Ive found that its increased my confidence
Page | 37

Liberating Reduced isolation Ive built up self esteem Im adding value to something and feel that I have valuable contribution to make I have an increased knowledge of the business environment Scrutiny has given opportunities to challenge our landlord and be part of improvement process. Holding organisations to account they cant hide. Ensures their evidence and figures are accurate and kept correctly. Gives tenants a bigger voice and allows them to influence services. Highlights any lack of internal knowledge within the organisation. Its changing staff perceptions of resident involvement and residents as a whole. Captures tenants perception of an issue before and after each review. It promotes the fact that the landlord actually listens. Its lead to changes in service delivery especially how tenants are communicated with. Its improved customer service process and communication between different teams in the organisation. There is now more staff buy in as scrutiny has developed. It builds relationships between staff and tenants and makes organisations much more transparent. Its changed managers attitude towards tenants. Managers value input of tenants much more now. Its improved standards for tenants. Its improved levels of choice in modernisation programme. Its made efficiencies by improving the process and saving money. Focusing and publicising outcomes encourages more customers to get involved in scrutiny. Were guilty of not shouting enough about outcomes

How can we capture these outcomes? The landlord should use something like Housemark for example to collate outcomes and then make them available for everyone to look at and compare. Capture outcomes by advertising on website/ social networks/ via CIH/ inside housing. Survey tenants after scrutiny with specific questions what has changed following scrutiny? Look at the cost savings in comparison to external consultants and publicise this to staff.
Page | 38

Monitor outcomes to ensure they are carried out (action plan0. Use surveys as long as the response level is high. Detailed feedback with a response. Plan to review nay recommendations in 3 months time Make clear records and action points in minutes. Ensure different panels (in the organisation) are talking to each other. People stories how their lives have been improved because of change. Breaking down barriers. Small things are important. Use people stories show how their lives have been improved because of the changes Events like this. Have a resource area on the website. Work on outcomes getting it out, local outcomes. Sometimes are not positive but they should also be publicised. Get an outside perspective (councillor members, resident members) Negotiate on improvements. Longer term outcomes take time to come to fruition. Go back after a period of time. This is the hardest part proving it!!

Other comments; Ensure the organisation buys into the concept of scrutiny. Explain to staff the reasons for scrutiny. Publicise existing outcomes to get staff to buy in. Ensure the scrutiny panel have access to whoever they want, senior officers, front line officers and contractors. Ensure that scrutiny has commitment from Board/ Chief Exec downwards. Ensure scrutiny feeds straight into the Board. Have a clear brief at very beginning, what are your aims and what do you want to get out of it in at the end. Scrutiny must be target led. Tenants should choose the area to scrutinise. Have documents in plain English. Performance figures that tenants can understand and want. In larger organisations have a co-ordinating panel so that each group is scrutinising the same thing. Be realistic about the amount of work for those volunteering we were told 4 hours a week but its actually been much more including working from home. Use mentors for new members (to scrutiny groups) Jargon is used too often and its not understood by everyone. Whilst there are opportunities to attend training be mindful about the impact this will have on volunteers.
Page | 39

 Recruitment process is vital with so many personalities involved. Vital that everyone gels and that a good cross section of experience is covered. Panel members were often approached by residents who expected them to be able to influence decisions for them. Think about where meetings will be held. Housing offices are fine but doesnt help with being independent. Some panels are looking to become less reliant on their organisations so that they dont feel so influenced by them. Give tenants credit for ideas they come up with. Organisational examples of the approach organisations have adopted for customer scrutiny which were given on the day . Bernicia Bernicia have established a framework which mirrors the consumer standards within the regulatory framework for social housing and have completed 4 service inspections over the last year. The scrutiny panel decide on which areas to review based on performance information and complaints which have been received. They then task their tenant inspectors to carry out the actual reviews and report back with their findings and recommendations for the scrutiny panel to decide. A report is then produced for the Board to consider and some of the outcomes they have achieved include; Fewer missed gas servicing appointments and less staff time lost chasing outstanding services. Faster void turnaround times. Increased response rates for customer satisfaction surveys which in turn has provided better information for the organisation to act upon Agreed new timescales for answering telephone calls which were actually lengthened to make them more realistic

Broadacres The panel at Broadacres have carried out a range of service reviews including the customer contact centre, estate services and the new tenant journey and are currently reviewing planned maintenance. The panel aim to carry out between 2 and 3 reviews a year depending on the size of the service being reviewed. Areas for review are discussed and agreed with staff and the Board and are based on performance data, feedback from complaints and results from ongoing customer satisfaction surveys.
Page | 40

Although the panel have previously received assistance in producing their reports they have always had final editorial control on the version presented to the Board and they monitor the organisations responses at their regular meetings. Some of the outcomes from their reviews include; Actively involve local monitors in reviewing the work of the new grounds maintenance contractor. Develop a simple flow chart for prospective customers so they understand how choice based lettings works

Cestria The scrutiny panel at Cestria have carried out a review of the aids and adaptations process and produced a report with over 20 recommendations (some of which were simply procedural with no actual costs involved in their implementation), all of which were accepted by the Board. For example the review recommended that the organisation employ an Occupational Therapist to help reduce the waiting time for adaptations and that there should be more publicity of the services on offer to customers. The panel have agreed an action plan with timescales for implementation and they will continue to monitor this until it is completed. Coast and Country Panel members at Coast and Country feel that scrutiny has made a huge difference as scrutiny is now embedded throughout the organisation and they have been able to break down the barriers which used to exist between customers and staff. The panel works closely with the Board at Coast and Country and they offer each board member the opportunity to sit in on their meetings to help build trust and to demonstrate full transparency. Their view is that without transparency and trust then scrutiny would be ineffective, scrutiny is like a critical friend. Dale and Valley The scrutiny panel at Dale and Valley decide on which topics to review and carry out 3 reviews per year. So far this year they have reviewed ASB, Repairs and Maintenance and are currently reviewing the organisations Decent Homes Programme.

Page | 41

They have their own budget and link in to the Finance and Audit Committee and have found that all their suggestions to date have been agreed by the Board. Durham City Homes The scrutiny panel have completed 9 service reviews in 3 years and have won 2 business awards by Durham County Council. The panel feel that they are able to talk to staff at all levels within the organisation and have introduced a traffic light system for their draft reports before they are presented to the Board. What this means in practice is that only those recommendations which require Board approval have to go them before they are agreed and the panel have found that this helps smooth the process and make it more transparent. The panel have previously carried out a review of the complaints process and have seen a decrease in the number of complaints since as a result of their suggestions. The panel also go back to do spot checks of any areas they have reviewed to ensure that the actions are still working. Derwentside Homes The panel at Derwentside Homes carried out a review of the repairs satisfaction process in which they identified a fault with the computer system. The panel have had feedback from officers that the system is working better now and they will check this as part of their follow up work. In addition to reviewing any information presented to them by the organisation, the panel have also taken the unique approach of carrying out a door to door survey on an unpopular estate in the area to find out what the real issues are from the tenants perspective. East Durham Homes The East Durham Homes panel have carried out a range of reviews including repairs and maintenance. Some of recommendations they made included; Ensuring that whoever goes out to complete a job has the right tools. Communicate more effectively with customers waiting for repairs by notifying them 24 hours before an operative is due to call as well as sending a reminder one hour before the scheduled visit. Operatives to wear overshoes before entering property to protect carpets.

Page | 42

The panel were keen to point out the common sense approach they have adopted to their reviews which they feel has encouraged more people both customers and staff to contribute to the process now that they understand and trust it. Endeavour The scrutiny panel at Endeavour aim to complete 3 reviews a year and to date have covered a range of areas including new tenancies, telephone service, former tenants arrears and customer experience of planned maintenance. They choose and complete all the scrutiny work themselves and report their recommendations directly to the Board. The panel also receive updates of action plans from each scrutiny review at their monthly meetings to ensure that actions are implemented. Some of the outcomes from their reviews include; Livin The panel at Livin are very new and are currently working on their first review on Aids and adaptations. They are particularly keen to understand any issues relating to waiting times and aim to produce a draft report within 3 months. The panel consists of 7 tenants but their Chair is an independent person from out of the area. 2 members of staff are involved to take the minutes and to offer help and advice where necessary. All members have been given a task to complete and meet twice a month for training which is being carried out by an outside company. Vela (Tristar Homes and Housing Hartlepool) The Vela group is relatively new and customers have noticed that there has been a difference in approach to scrutiny at each organisation which is now being harmonised. The panel and service improvement groups can suggest topics for scrutiny but the final decision is then made by Board. There are no Tenant Board members on the scrutiny group and all members have to sign a confidentiality agreement.
Page | 43

A central call handling team has been introduced which has resulted in quicker, better service for tenants. Starter tenancies have been introduced. Easier to understand satisfaction surveys have been implemented.

The scrutiny panel at Tristar had previously reviewed the organisations approach to managing low and middle rise properties. One of the key outcomes from this review were the changes to the planned investment programme which included; The type of door entry systems installed The finish to the external render to meet tenants expectations Saving money by dingo windows the same time as the rendering which reduced scaffolding costs. This VFM for tenants and common sense.

The panel have also reviewed the customer contact centre and used a range of tools including customer journey mapping. The review discovered that operators also did paperwork while taking calls and that confidential information was left out in the open. The panel produced a report for consideration by the management team and all their suggestions have been implemented.

Appendix 5. Organisations who attended

Bernicia Broadacres Byker Community Trust Cestria Community Housing Chartered Institute of Housing Coast and Country Housing Dale and Valley Homes Darlington BC Derwentside Homes Durham City Homes East Durham Homes Endeavour Housing Association Fabrick Group
Page | 44

Gentoo Home Group Homes for Northumberland ISOS Housing Johnnie Johnson Housing Trust livin Riverside South Tyneside Homes The Gateshead Housing Company Vela Group Yorkshire Housing Your Homes Newcastle

Appendix 6. Contact details and useful information

Mark Soundie: Website: www.marksoundie.com Email: info@marksoundie.com Twitter: @marksoundie Broadacres Housing Association Website: http://www.broadacres.org.uk/ Email: info@broadacres.org.uk Twitter: @BroadacresHA Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/user/BroadacresHousing The event was filmed and is available to view online at: https://www.youtube.com/user/BroadacresHousing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5466yz3-e3Q

Page | 45