Agenda item

Michelle Hoyles, Business Manager, Corporate Policy:

a)    presented Housing Scrutiny Sub-Committee with a verbal summary on performance indicators for the Directorate of Housing and Investment (DHI) for Quarter 2 of 2023/24 (July – September)

b)    added that regular monitoring of the Council’s performance was a key component of the Local Performance Management Framework and supported its ongoing commitment to continuous improvement of Council services

c)    confirmed that there was a total of twenty-one performance indicators monitored by DHI. An overview of performance for the second quarter of 2023/24, against such indicators, was attached at Appendix A to the report.

d)    reported that of the 21 measures in total; eight had met or exceeded their agreed target, five had performed close to target and seven had performed below target. Three of the measures found to be performing close to target were ‘year-end’ measures and included two measures that cumulatively recorded expenditure in maintenance and capital works

e)    added the third and final year-end measure related to the proportion of homes not at ‘decent homes standard’. Performance against this measure, whilst formally recorded at year end, had notable improvement since Quarter 1 and therefore had moved closer to target

f)      referred to Appendix A of the report which attempted to simplify the overall analysis by listing performance on a service functional basis (rents, repairs, etc) and then showing the source of the indicator (reason)

g)    confirmed that further, detailed information on the areas highlighted was provided within the report

h)    invited comments and questions from Members of the Committee.

Members discussed the content of the report, commented, asked questions and received relevant responses from Officers as follows:

Question: Was there a figure available for response in maintenance?

Response: A total of £2.2M had been spent, 28.75% of the budget.

Question: Referred to Appendix A of the report. The figure of closed Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) cases had been listed within the appendix however the total number of opened cases was not present. It would be helpful to know how many cases were opened as a comparative tool.

Response: The number of closed ASB cases was 138. It would be difficult to expand on the data further, as the figures were compiled on a quarterly basis. Therefore, it may be the case that an ASB case was opened in one quarter and closed in another.

Question: Did the new system pick up online repairs? Concerns had been raised by Customer Services that online repair requests had not been actioned.

Response: It was not necessary to speak to Customer Services to report a repair using the online system. The online repair took had worked well and repairs had been received through the system. Regular dialogue took place between Customer Service staff and resource planners at Hamilton House.

Comment: Members of LTP had worked with Officers regarding voids and things had progressed a long way.

Note: Councillor Alan Briggs wished his thanks be noted, on record, to Amy Larder, Interim Maintenance Manager for the improved planning at Hamilton House and her continued expertise.

Comment: When consideration was given to figures for Quarter 2, the arrears increase in monetary terms was £53,000 less than the same time last year. It was common in Quarter 2 for this target not to be met. During the two-week rent-free period in December, the target would shift to green and should remain in green for Quarter 3. It was common for the time of year.

Question: The achieved number for ASB cases was 42 days. Why had the ASB target remained on 70 days?

Response: It was important not to rush the closure of an ASB case as it could prove detrimental to the case.

Comment: Some ASB cases needed sound equipment etc and therefore could take longer than the 70 days to close.

Comment: Targets were considered in consultation with LTP and the Portfolio Holder, however targets were agreed by the Members of the HSSC.

Comment fromDonald Nannestad, Portfolio Holder for Quality Housing: Some cases proceeded further than 46 days and therefore, the figure was an average.

Comment: Should the target be reduced to a very short amount of time; the onus would then be placed on officers. Therefore, a case may not be dealt with as effectively as it may have been with a longer time frame given. Consequently, it could result in a large number of ASB cases regarding one resident.

RESOLVED that the current performance outcomes during Quarter 2 of the financial year 2023/24 to date, be noted.