Centre for Public Scrutiny annual conference

Here is the summary from the CfPS newsletter and presentations which will be useful for you:

“In December the Centre for Public Scrutiny hosted a successful conference on democracy, governance, and the truth. We have written up the key highlights and messages from the event and put all available presentations on the conference our website.

CfPS is also pleased to announce that its national local government scrutiny conference will take place on December 6, 2017 once again at the Holiday Inn, London”

Supported and Sheltered Housing changes and consultation

I listened in to an excellent seminar run by the NHF.

Here are the slides:

Future_of_Supported_Housing_webinar_(December_2016)

Members of the NHF will be able to listen to the webinar in person through the NHF members website.

 

There is consultation out now from the government about the future of supported housing from 2019

The closing date for consulttaion on 13th february 2017 – please do get involved in the conversation.

161121_-_Supported_housing_consultation

Role of Boards and Committees in governing culture

What roles do your board and your main board committees play in shaping and monitoring your organisation’s culture?

What questions should they be asking themselves and management about organisational values and purpose, employee
behaviours and attitudes, reward structures and the way things are done?

What observable andmeasurable indicators do your board committees use as a proxy for assessing culture?

Your responses could indicate how effectively your board and committees are addressing the impact of organisational culture on corporate performance.

Here is the report wiht the answers in!

160414_deregulation_member_briefing

 

Benefit cap changes

This is a useful briefing from CIH on what the change will mean and implementation:

408375_what-you-need-to-know-about-the-lower-overall-benefit-cap

Altair report suggests HAs are becoming more commercial

level-of-transformation-infographic

 

‘Future gazing, Future shaping: Insights into housing in 2025’, shows the housing sector is on a “trajectory of rapid change”.

Here is the report:

Altair_Future_Gazing_Report_01_Vision-for-2025_FINAL

In a series of reports Altair are producing, the first looks at digitalisation and the need to respond to a changing environment.

In a survey of 70 housing associations, findings reveal 65% of organisations are transforming their organisations now, with a further 29% planning a transformation programme.

Many have stated the need to be more commercial as their reasoning, with the need to be more agile and efficient also big drivers.

how-organisations-are-transforming-infographic

Against a backdrop of falling government funding and less rental income, organisations told the survey they saw full digitalisation of the business as a “prerequisite for the housing provider of the future”.

Nearly a quarter had experimented or fully implemented digital applications and a further 29% felt they understood how to drive value with digital transformation.

However, 44% of respondents said they were either digital conservatives or digital beginners.

how-does-the-sector-see-itself-now-infographic

The organisations driving this new technology recognise they need new responsive services that customers want.

The report aims to forecast a vision for housing in 2025, reflect the transformation in the sector and identify what can be learned, not only from in the sector, but from external sectors too.

With technology at the forefront of this transformation, technology and digitalisation expertise is likely to increasingly be needed at executive and board levels in the sector.

Although it is difficult to predict exactly what will be required in 2025, the report concludes existing providers should brace themselves for significant changes.

This may include new entrants that entirely disrupt existing business models and practices. In this future, successful housing providers will have made a step change in the way they think and the way services are provided.

The second report in the ‘future gazing: future shaping’ series will explore key trends around how the sector is currently approaching both innovation and transformation, including examples of who is doing what.

The third report then explores what interesting innovations can and are being learnt from other sectors on the journey to a vision for 2025.

You can find them on 24housing when they are released.

Housing and Planning Act 2016 – latest

This briefing addresses a number of frequently asked questions about the main measures which are included in the Housing and Planning Act 2016. It focuses on the four main areas of starter homes, the sale of vacant high value council homes, pay to stay, and fixed term tenancies

Thanks CIH – its hard to keep up, this is useful:

Housing and Planning Act FAQs

Earling and learning – difficulties for young people

Boosting social mobility in Britain requires better education-to-work transitions for young people who have low qualifications. Reviewing the evidence, this report recommends that the government introduces a new, distinct pre-apprenticeship programme for 16–18-year-olds.

According to IPPRs new report:

earning-and-learning_Nov2016

earning-and-learning_Nov2016

earning-and-learning_Nov2016

Too many 16–18-year-olds are studying level 2 courses that do not help them progress to higher levels of vocational education or start a successful career. This is contributing to England’s relatively high levels of youth unemployment, as many young people struggle to make the transition from education to work.

The current system of vocational education does not provide the right balance between ‘earning and learning’ for this group of young people. There is a particular problem with level 2 apprenticeships, which are not currently well designed to meet the needs of 16–18-year-olds: they are often very job specific, they do not include much off-the-job training, they only last one year, and – from next year – they will not be required to include a recognised qualification. The current system therefore falls short of the recommendations of the recent Sainsbury review of technical education. This review called for level 2 programmes for 16–18-year-olds that last two years, have a common core of knowledge, and result in a single, nationally-recognised certificate linked to a broad occupational pathway.

Improving education-to-work transitions for young people who have low qualifications will be crucial for any attempt to boost social mobility in Britain. We recommend that the government phases out level 2 apprenticeships for 16–18-year-olds, and replaces them with a distinct pre-apprenticeship programme. This would be designed to meet the specific needs of younger learners and help them to progress to further study or a full level 3 apprenticeship.

The pre-apprenticeship programme would differ from the current apprenticeship programme in key ways:

Pre-apprenticeships would contain more ‘off the job’ training
Pre-apprenticeships would include more general education (including English and maths)
Pre-apprenticeships would result in a transferable qualification.
Employers would be subsidised for hiring a young person on a pre-apprenticeship (they could be allowed to use their levy payment to cover a young person’s wages while on the programme).
There would be one ‘pre-apprenticeship programme’ for each of the 15 technical pathways identified in the recent Sainsbury review and government skills plan.
Pre-apprenticeships would only be offered by FE colleges, or training providers which are run on a not-for-profit basis.
KEY FINDINGS

England has struggled for many years to support young people to make the transition from education into work. Even after the recent economic recovery, 16–24-year-olds remain nearly three times more likely to be unemployed than adults.

Many of the difficulties that young people face in finding secure employment have their roots in the 16–18 phase of education. There is a particularly acute problem for those people studying level 2 vocational courses (GCSE or equivalent). There are currently around 270,000 16–18-year-olds studying on level 2 courses, including 90,000 enrolled on apprenticeships.

There are a number of clear indicators that this group of learners are not being adequately prepared either for further study or for the jobs market.

Young people with a level 2 qualification find it harder to get work than their better-educated peers. Young people who leave full-time education with a level 2 qualification have an employment rate of 70 per cent – almost 20 percentage points lower than those of their peers who leave full-time education with a level 3 qualification or higher education.
They find it harder to progress onto higher qualifications. Only 39 per cent of students pursuing a level 2 qualification at age 17 move on to a level 3 course, which suggests that it is hard for 16–18-year-olds studying a level 2 qualification to move up the skills ladder.
Some young people become stuck in a ‘cycle’ of low-level qualifications. A quarter of those pursuing a level 2 qualification at age 17 are still working towards a qualification of the same level a year later, and 8 per cent have moved down a level.
Taken as a whole, the data above suggests that the English post-16 phase of education is not designed in a way that supports young people who are studying level 2 qualifications to progress into higher levels of study or decent jobs. This is the phase during which the journey from education to work can start to break down for a significant number of young people.

Evidence from other countries suggests that the key to addressing this problem is to develop high-quality programmes that enable young people to move up the skills ladder while combining both ‘earning and learning’. Countries such as Germany, Norway, the Netherlands and Denmark all have far lower levels of youth unemployment than England, in part because they have established vocational programmes that combine a good mix of off-the-job training, on-the-job training and general education. These programmes typically entail a learner spending half their time in a work setting, and the other half in a classroom setting, and enable young people to progress into a higher-level course or apprenticeship.

Despite a number of positive reforms in recent years – including the introduction of study programmes and technical pathways – the English system of vocational education has not yet designed level 2 courses that have the right mix of off-the-job training, on-the-job training and general education. Students on college-based programmes do not gain enough work experience, while those on employment-based programmes do not receive enough off-the-job education.

There is a particular problem with the design of apprenticeships, which are not currently well suited to meet the needs of 16–18-year-olds. They are often very job specific, do not include much off-the-job training, only last one year, and from next year they will not be required to include a recognised qualification. These sort of training programmes may make sense for adults who are already in work and looking to ‘top up’ their skills – however, they are not sufficient to help young people with relatively low levels of education get a foot on the career ladder.

The design of level 2 apprenticeships stands in stark contrast to the recommendations of the recent Sainsbury review of technical education, which recommended that young people on level 2 courses undertake a two-year programme with a common core of knowledge that results in a certificate linked to a clear occupational pathway. The challenge facing policymakers is to design apprenticeships for young people that fulfil this vision.

RECOMMENDATION

The government should phase out level 2 apprenticeships for 16–18-year-olds, and replace them with a distinct pre-apprenticeship programme for this group. The pre-apprenticeship programme could evolve out of the existing system, but be designed to address explicitly the distinct needs of younger learners.

The new pre-apprenticeship programme would differ from the current apprenticeships in the following ways.

Pre-apprenticeships would contain more ‘off the job training’ (50 per cent of time would be spent on ‘off the job’ training, instead of the present 20 per cent): young people require more general education and foundational vocational knowledge to help them start a career.
Pre-apprenticeships would result in a transferable qualification linked to the technical pathways proposed in the Sainsbury review: this will help young people to progress to higher levels of study.
Employers would be subsidised for hiring young apprentices (they could be allowed to use their levy payment to cover a young person’s wages while on the programme): this would give them a clear financial incentive to take part in the programme.
There would be one ‘pre-apprenticeship programme’ for each of the 15 technical pathways identified in the recent Sainsbury review: this would ensure they are sufficiently broad and link to a clear progression pathway.
Pre-apprenticeships would only be offered by FE colleges: given pre-apprenticeships will have a much greater educational component and be targeted at young people under the age of 18, they should only be offered by colleges and training providers that are run on a not-for-profit basis.
Pre-apprenticeships would be explicitly designed to help young people move onto a full level 3 apprenticeship at age 18 or 19.
This recommendation would help to improve the quality of the training received by 16–18-year-olds who are currently enrolled on level 2 apprenticeships. It could also prove attractive to those who currently enrol on level 2 study programmes in college. Ultimately, it will expand the number of young people who are on a high-quality ‘earning and learning’ route with good prospects for progressing to higher-level study.

Smaller HAs need to collaborate to compete

Smaller housing associations need to collaborate with each other in order to compete with larger landlords in a “new era” of mergers, the chair of the Homes and Communities Agency Regulation Committee has cautioned.

At the Placeshapers annual conference in London Julian Ashby said the “unprecedented” number of merger conversations could present “some quite big challenges to the Placeshapers model”. Placeshapers membership is largely made up of smaller housing associations which have a local focus.

Mr Ashby said if merged organisations manage to make the efficiencies they have promised and increase housing supply then smaller housing associations “are going to have to step up quite a bit in order to match that”.

He said: “I do think you’re going to need to do that more if you’re going to match [larger associations’] forecasts of reducing costs and increasing supply.”

He added although there is currently “no evidence” that “scale equals cost efficiency” this is likely to change in the next two or three years.

He added however that the regulator is “fine” if smaller housing associations do not want to merge and that it would be impractical to suppose the regulator would “somehow become the agent for government in terms of re-shaping the sector”.

He added: “You have to thank [the Office for National Statistics] for keeping the government honest about the issue because there’s no chance of the reclassification to private if the government is going to say ‘you’ve got to do it like this’.”

Whereas old mergers were driven by whether or not a chief executive was coming up for retirement, Mr Ashby said the “enforced efficiency savings” of the 1% rent cut will push along new mergers.

Regulator to go public with cost data of HAs

The English social housing regulator will publish data showing named individual housing associations’ costs this year, as part of its drive to improve the sector’s efficiency.

The Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) published a ‘regression analysis’ this year for the first time since 2012. The aggregated data, which did not reveal individual providers’ figures, showed ‘unexplained’ differences in running costs between different landlords.

However, Julian Ashby, chair of the HCA Regulation Committee, told the Social Housing Annual Conference in London  that a further analysis of the cost data will be carried out by the regulator next year. It is understood this will involve publication of the full underlying dataset, including data for named individual organisations.

While the regulator has no plans to sort the data into high and low-performing organisations, its plan will raise fears that those with high running costs could find themselves named and shamed.

 

46 regulatory judgements published in November

The English social housing regulator has re-confirmed the governance and financial viability ratings of 46 housing associations.

The Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) published its latest batch of regulatory judgements in Mid November.

None of the landlords in the judgements had their financial viability or governance ratings upgraded or downgraded. This means the HCA has not today published full judgements explaining the reasons for the grading, as it only does this when a rating has changed.

Of the 46 landlords, all are in compliance with regulatory standards, with the exception of Symphony Housing Group, which still has a ‘G3’ rating for governance. The Liverpool-based landlord was downgraded in July following concern about weaknesses in its data on housing stock. The HCA said at the time this meant the 41,000-home group could not provide assurance it was compliant with health and safety requirements. It however holds the top ‘V1’ rating for financial viability.

Among the notable landlords to keep their compliant ratings are Guinness Partnership, Orbit Group and Your Housing Group (see table below).

The HCA now publishes more frequent regulatory judgements than it has in the past as it now carries out an annual “stability check” on all providers, which leads to a fresh judgement.

LATEST JUDGEMENTS

Housing association Governance (G) Viability (V) – one is the highest rating you can get
Accord Housing Association G1 V1
Axiom Housing Association G1 V1
Bournemouth Churches Housing Association G2 V2
Bromsgrove District Housing Trust G1 V1
Community Housing Group G2 V1
Connect Housing Association G1 V1
Cottsway Housing Association G1 V1
Derwentside Homes G1 V1
East Thames Group G1 V2
English Rural Housing Association G1 V1
ForViva Group G1 V1
Golden Lane Housing G1 V1
Great Places Housing Group G1 V1
Greensquare Group G1 V1
Guinness Partnership G1 V1
Hastoe Housing Association G1 V1
Housing Solutions G1 V1
Irwell Valley Housing Association G1 V1
Knowsley Housing Trust G1 V1
Livin Housing G1 V1
Midland Heart G1 V1
Moat Homes G1 V1
Muir Group Housing Association G1 V1
New Charter Housing Trust G1 V1
Newlon Housing Trust G1 V1
North Star Housing Group G1 V1
Nottingham Community Housing Association G1 V1
Ocean Housing Group G1 V2
One Manchester G1 V1
Orbit Group G1 V1
Paradigm Housing Group G1 V1
Red Kite Community Housing G1 V1
Salix Homes G1 V2
Sentinel Housing Association G1 V1
Shoreline Housing Partnership G1 V2
South Lakes Housing G1 V1
South Liverpool Homes G1 V1
Symphony Housing Group G3 V1
Torus62 G1 V1
Town & Country Housing Group G1 V1
Tuntum Housing Association G2 V1
Unity Housing Association G1 V1
Vale of Aylesbury Housing G1 V1
Watford Community Housing G1 V1
Worthing Homes G1 V1
Your Housing Group G2 V1