Back to top arrow icon Back to top
  1. Home
  2. Agenda item
 Menu

Agenda item

Housing Services Resident Engagement Strategy 2022-25

Minutes:

4.1 The Chair opened the item by explaining that the Commission was keen to hear about the progress the Council had made against the key commitments outlined in the Housing Services Resident Engagement Strategy (RES), and any plans for it to be refreshed to reflect what had been achieved and new things which may need to be done.

 

4.2 The Commission saw this discussion as a timely means of monitoring progress in delivering the action plan against the five strategic priorities of the strategy.

 

4.3 Representing London Borough of Hackney

·  Councillor Clayeon McKenzie, Cabinet Member for Housing Services & Resident Participation

·  Steve Waddington, Strategic Director Housing Services

·  Helena Stephenson, Assistant Director Tenancy Services

·  Sarah Kulay, Head of Resident Participation, TMOs and Communities

 

4.4 External Guests

·  Steve Webster, Resident Liaison Group Co-Chair

 

4.5 The Chair then invited the Cabinet Member for Housing Services & Resident Participation and Council officers to give a verbal presentation. The main points are highlighted below.

 

4.6 The RES was co-produced with residents, with its development had been overseen by a Project Champions Group, made up of the Resident Liaison Group (RLG) Co-Chairs and the Cabinet Member for Housing Services and Resident Participation, alongside a wider Strategy Scrutiny Group bringing together officers and involved and uninvolved residents.

 

4.7 Final proposals were informed by wider feedback from housing residents and staff, including focus groups, major surveys, and outreach to residents via local community and faith groups. This provided confidence that the direction outlined in the final document was a fair representation of the issues and challenges residents faced, and their priorities for improvement.

 

4.8 The strongest message from the consultation was a need to get the basics right, with a stronger focus on timely, transparent and honest communication. It was also clear that some tenants and residents associations (TRAs) wanted more support, and some residents who were not involved felt that some TRAs needed to be more inclusive.

 

4.9 Strategic Priority 1 (Embed a ‘Resident First’ culture across the service) focused on actions to ensure that the service culture, and behaviour of staff, puts the residents’ voice at the centre of its work, with policies, service delivery and priorities shaped by active listening and engagement.

 

4.10 To support this priority the service had worked with involved residents to agree on a set of new service standards. This had resulted in a suite of 21 indicators which reflected a focus on getting the basics right.

 

4.11 There had also been a focus on embedding improvements in service performance in those areas which were a high priority for residents. This included repairs, customer contact and responding to damp and mould.

 

4.12 The service had also sought to enable strong engagement between the involved resident structure and senior housing leaders, with the development of all new housing policies and procedures to include resident engagement.

 

4.13 It had also looked to ensure regular and effective communication of key housing messages and service developments to the wider resident base, using a variety of channels such as social media, leaflets, Love Hackney features, estate posters and the residents’ annual report.

 

4.14 Strategic Priority 2 (Support involved residents’ groups to thrive) focused on work to support tenants and residents' groups to be as effective as possible and to work in ways that supported the service’s engagement principles.

 

4.15 This year the focus had been on developing the tools and support to better promote the creation and sustainment of TRAs. This included the development of a new guide to resident engagement which set out a range of information and guidance on setting up and running a TRA, including templates and policies that can be used and adapted by new groups, and advice on other forms of engagement.

 

4.16 The service had also worked with involved residents to develop a new model constitution for TRAs and a refreshed code of conduct. Consultation on these new model documents would take place early in 2024.

 

4.17 It had also published a new Resident Training Programme, based on feedback from TRAs. The new programme was designed to support both new and existing involved residents, with sessions on running a successful TRA, chairing meetings, taking minutes and dealing with finance, as well as more specialist courses.

 

4.18 Since 2022 10 new TRAs had been formed, meaning there were now 55 TRAs covering the Council’s directly managed homes. The service would continue to work at grassroots level to support new and emerging groups and to run activities on unrepresented estates.

 

4.19 Strategic Priority 3 (Widen the ways residents can engage with us) focused on widening the range of engagement options available, with opportunities tailored to the different needs, lifestyles and interests of Hackney’s diverse communities.

 

4.20 So far, the service had extended opportunities for residents to make contact online for bookings and appointments., as well as creating new opportunities for residents involved in community gardens to come together to share their experiences and network.

 

4.21 It had also recruited to a new Housing Services Youth Forum, with 13 young people now signed up. The Forum would provide a platform for young people to have their say about housing services, influence how the service engages with young people, and support wider succession planning in the involved structure.

 

4.22 There had been a strong focus on the approach to housing estate surgeries with 225 estate-based surgeries held between April and October 2023. The approach had evolved to deliver surgeries in partnership with voluntary and community groups. Opportunities to co-locate in GPs surgeries were also being developed, helping the service to work more collaboratively with health colleagues and support healthy placemaking.

 

4.23 Strategic Priority 4 (Ensure that residents influence our decision-making and drive service improvement) focused on how the service would work with residents so that they could influence decision-making and ensure that proposals for improvement reflect their priorities and concerns.

 

4.24 There had been a strong focus on getting residents’ views through surveys and consultation exercises, particularly on spending priorities, rent increases, estate surgeries and annual resident satisfaction (STAR) surveys.

 

4.25 A new performance dashboard had also been developed which would be presented at each RLG meeting and provided further opportunities for the group to hold management to account and challenge under-performance.

 

4.25 A new framework for resident scrutiny was in development, which would include a Resident Scrutiny Panel comprising up to 12 residents who were not currently involved. The Panel would undertake two scrutiny reviews per year, with recommendations for improvement presented to and monitored by both the Panel and Housing Services Management Team.

 

4.26 Strategic Priority 5 (Promote engagement activity that strengthens our communities) focused on the work to promote the integration and resilience of housing communities and build partnerships with others services and the third sector to develop projects that delivered community benefits.

 

4.27 To support this, the service had allocated 100% of the Community Development Fund in 2022/23 to support TRA and other resident-led projects and initiatives, and was on track to spend the full budget again in 2023/24.

 

4.28 It had also continued to support over 50 community gardens and grow projects across estates, with 13 new projects taken forward in 2023, including those on Pond Farm, Nightingale Estate, Landfield Estate, Wick Village, and Sandford Court and St Andrews Mews.

 

4.29 Initiatives had been developed to support residents during the cost of living crisis. This included awarding grant funding of £40k to voluntary and community partners to extend their provision to offer warm spaces during the winter months, and producing the cost of living booklet, with information on money and debt, free food and activities in the borough, and jobs and training support.

 

4.30 Two estate-based food projects had been funded to support housing residents, and the use of community halls had been promoted by funding health and wellbeing projects, digital skills classes and young projects.

 

4.31 In terms of monitoring impact, bids to run youth and other commissioned projects were evaluated with a focus on value for money, deliverability and service quality. Projects were underpinned by service levels agreements, with a range of output/outcome measures such as level of participation and retention, impact on participant behaviour and personal development.

 

4.32 The RES Action Plan included key milestones and KPI indicators for the 42 actions, with a range of output and outcome indicators and linked to work on implementing the new Social Housing Regulator consumer standards.

 

4.33 The annual STAR survey measured progress on key outcome indicators, and the 2023/24 survey showed improvements in all Tenant Satisfaction Measures (TSMs) - with the overall satisfaction level in the service rising from 52% in 2022/23 to 59%.

 

4.34 The Chair then invited the Resident Liaison Group (RLG) Co-Chair to give a verbal presentation. The main points are highlighted below.

 

4.35 There had been some areas of progress over the last year, and the RLG was looking forward to working with Housing Services to take forward other areas of work. Progress had been made in getting the basics right, for example, with the overall satisfaction in the service increasing.

 

4.36 The RLG did however have some areas of concern in regard to the implementation of the strategy. With the action plans yet to be finalised, it was difficult to see how the strategy could be implemented by 2025 as planned. There may therefore be a need to consider extending the implementation of the strategy until 2026/27.

 

4.37 It was felt that the action plans would need to be ambitious but also realistic and achievable within the current staffing and financial resources. They would also need to address service improvement issues, organisational culture change and the expectations of residents, elected members and staff.

 

4.38 The action plans would need to map out the journey to meet the five priorities identified in the strategy. That would require detailed action plans which were thoroughly consulted on and with buy in from residents, staff and elected members.

 

4.39 The action plans would require ownership and buy in from across Housing Services, but also other council services. Each department would need to focus on how their service and workforce could support the implementation of the strategy and ensure there was not an over reliance on the Resident Participation Team.

 

4.40 The action plans would also need to set out a clear process so that they could be reviewed, monitored, scrutinised and adjusted, with residents, staff and elected members involved throughout. There would also need to be strong engagement between senior management, residents and elected members to map out the relationship between the action plans, the overall strategy and the introduction of the Government's social housing regulatory framework.

 

Questions, Answers and Discussion

 

4.41 A Commission Member asked what steps had been taken to ensure the involved resident structure was representative of the wider community, and to bring residents who were not currently involved on board.

 

4.42 The Head of Resident Participation, TMOs and Communities explained that work to widen participation needed to be underpinned by better information about residents. This involved developing an approach to collecting data on protected characteristics and vulnerabilities, and profiling involved structures to better understand which groups and tenures may be under-represented.

 

4.43 In parallel to this work, the service was looking to create social and demographic profiles of neighbourhoods, drawing upon information from the 2021 Census and local knowledge of communities and local groups/organisations.

 

4.44 A Commission Member asked for further information on the governance arrangements for the new Housing Scrutiny Panel, and how its recommendations would be monitored.

 

4.45 The Head of Resident Participation, TMOs and Communities explained that the Resident Scrutiny Panel would comprise up to 12 residents who were not currently involved. The recruitment and training of Panel members would take place in the last quarter of 2023/24, and training and support would be provided for participants.

 

4.46 The Panel would undertake two scrutiny reviews per year, with recommendations for improvement presented to, and monitored, by both the Panel and Housing Services Management Team. The Housing Services Management Team was committed to being open and transparent in sharing information, and following up on recommendations.

 

4.47 Suggestions for topics would be put forward by Panel members, resident groups and the Housing Services Management Team. The topics would ultimately be agreed upon by members as part of the Panel’s work planning process.

 

4.48 A Commission Member asked for further information on how the recruitment process for the new Housing Scrutiny Panel would be publicised.

 

4.49 The Head of Resident Participation, TMOs and Communities explained that the recruitment process for the Housing Scrutiny Panel would be widely publicised. This included leaflets being widely distributed and shared in public spaces and on estates.

 

4.50 It would also include features in Love Hackney, as well as communications via the Council’s social media channels. Tenants’ and residents’ groups would also be encouraged to share the recruitment process with their networks.

 

4.51 A Commission Member asked how the impact and outcomes of projects undertaken to support Strategic Priority 5 (Promote engagement activity that strengthens our communities) would be evaluated.

 

4.52 The Head of Resident Participation, TMOs and Communities explained that the Community Development Fund (CDF) was used to support local resident-led projects and initiatives. A total of £191k had been made available for the current financial year, and residents could apply for up to £3.5k of funding depending on the size of their estate.

 

4.53 Separate funding was also available to support voluntary and community organisations to run activities on estates. For example, the Housing Youth Development Fund received £60k to fund commissioned youth projects across estates and funding was made available to support over 50 community gardens across estates.

 

4.54 Projects were evaluated through a range of output/outcome measures such as level of participation and retention, impact on participant behaviour and personal development. For example, particular focus would be given to increasing understanding of healthy lifestyles, increasing understanding and awareness of diversity and improving communication and social skills.

 

4.55 A Commission Member asked whether engagement activity looked the same across the borough, or whether it was tailored to reflect the needs of individual estates.

 

4.56 The Head of Resident Participation, TMOs and Communities explained that the service wanted to take a strategic approach to engagement activity, but retain the flexibility to be reactive to the needs of individual estates where appropriate.

 

4.57 In practice this meant that some areas of work, such as digital skills courses or health and wellbeing projects, may be offered widely across the borough, but there may also be instances where the Council supports tailored projects at a locality level.

 

4.58 A Commission Member asked for further information on the new Vulnerable Residents Policy.

 

4.59 The Assistant Director Tenancy Services explained that the service recognised that many housing residents experience financial hardship, social isolation, poor health and increasingly complex vulnerabilities.

 

4.60 To address this, a new policy to underpin the approach to supporting vulnerable households was being developed. It would be informed by wider work to improve data collection around protected characteristics and vulnerabilities, and would set out how the service offer would be flexed for residents with additional needs and those who were at risk of experiencing disadvantages in accessing services and inequality in outcomes once they do.

 

4.61 A Commission Member asked for further information on the level of responses to the Housing Services annual STAR survey.

 

4.62 The Strategic Director Housing Services explained that the annual STAR survey was undertaken over the summer, and around 13% of residents responded to the survey (2.5-3k respondents). This was a slight decrease on the previous year but the statistical relevance was similar.

 

4.63 It was advised that a breakdown for results of the survey and the number of responses by geography/tenure/demographics could be provided to Commission Members following the meeting.

 

4.64 A Commission Member asked how a culture of accountability would be embedded across the service, and how senior management would ensure service delivery was shaped by active listening and engagement with residents.

 

4.65 The Assistant Director Tenancy Services explained that promoting a culture of accountability was central to the overall focus of the RES, demonstrating how residents’ voice would be at the heart of policies, service delivery and priorities, but also being honest with residents about what they should expect from staff. 

 

4.66 This underlined the need for the RES to be owned across the service, with engagement understood as the responsibility of all housing leaders, managers and staff. It was recognised that staff having the right skills, being empowered to take decisions at the right level, and being accountable, were key to good service delivery.

 

4.67 To support this, a workforce development plan for Housing Services would be developed which would identify the skills and behaviours which needed to be embedded in different roles across the service, and create a staff training plan and updated staff induction packs.

 

4.68 A Commission Member asked whether there was confidence amongst senior management that the aims of the RES would be fulfilled in the timescales set out.

 

4.69 The Cabinet Member for Housing Services & Resident Participation recognised that delivering the actions identified in the RES in a timely manner was challenging, especially when considering capacity issues in some areas and increasing Council-wide financial constraints.

 

4.70 Nonetheless, there were some significant areas of progress, as well as some work that would be taken forward next year to further embed the approach and ensure that all actions were delivered by December 2025. Deliverability of key actions against the milestones set out in the action plan would continue to be monitored and amendments could be made if appropriate.

 

4.71 A Commission Member asked for further information on plans to strengthen neighbourhood panels.

 

4.72 The Head of Resident Participation, TMOs and Communities recognised that neighbourhood panels provided a forum to bring together TRAs to share experiences, consider common areas of concern, consider housing policy and performance and make suggestions for improvement.

 

4.73 The service would be revisiting recommendations made following a review undertaken with some of the Panel Chairs in 2021/22, including proposals to review the terms of reference, widen participation, and improve promotion of the meetings.

 

4.74 A Commission Member asked how staff managed the contact details of involved resident groups to ensure key housing messages and engagement opportunities were received.

 

4.75 The Head of Resident Participation, TMOs and Communities explained that a master list of the contact details of all involved resident groups was kept within the Resident Participation Team. It was recognised however that, since Covid, it had not been kept entirely up to date and work was underway to ensure an updated, centralised list was available to all staff across the service.

 

4.76 A Commission Member asked for further information on plans to ensure more effective follow up on issues raised by TRAs.

 

4.77 The Head of Resident Participation, TMOs and Communities explained that all registered TRAs could hold quarterly meetings with their housing officers (ETRA meetings) to flag areas of concern and follow up on matters raised that remain.

 

4.78 A new online ETRA monitoring tool had recently been developed to better track performance on the actions arising from these meetings and this was now being rolled out to housing officers. The service was working to embed this way of working over the next few months, and develop a more accessible version of the tool so that TRAs could monitor follow-up from their meetings in real time.

 

4.79 A Commission Member asked for further information on plans to increase promotion of the benefits of TRAs and encourage more interest in formal resident involvement.

 

4.80 The Head of Resident Participation, TMOs and Communities explained that there was a target to reach out to 30 unrepresented estates per year to promote the benefits of TRAs, which was often exceeded. Staff also continued to work at grassroots level to support new and emerging groups, and to run activities on unrepresented estates.

 

Summing Up

 

4.81 The Chair thanked Commission Members for their questions and all witnesses for their responses and engagement with the scrutiny process.

 

4.82 It was explained that, after the meeting, the Commission would reflect on the evidence heard and may make suggestions or recommendations for consideration.

Supporting documents: