Presentation on theme: "Joint meeting 12 th January 2015. Background May 2013 Joint NFA and HouseMark Meeting July 2013 HouseMark - "You Said we Did" report April 2014 HouseMark."— Presentation transcript:
Background May 2013 Joint NFA and HouseMark Meeting July 2013 HouseMark - "You Said we Did" report April 2014 HouseMark - "Benchmarking is changing " May 2014 CWAG meeting HouseMark presentation End of 2014 CWAG & NFA joint working
January 2015 – Joint Meeting Who attended Philip Toni – Wolverhampton Homes Su Spence – Poole Housing Partnership Faye Williams – Berneslai Homes Tim Campbell – LB Barnet (client side) Julia Lansdowne – Cornwall Council (client side) Barbara Grant – LB Lambeth (client side) Alison Freeman – CWAG Ross Fraser – HouseMark Paul Edwards – HouseMark Chloe Fletcher - NFA
You Said We Did Data automation - system review and further development Cost benchmarking - constant review of model re changing role of ALMO’s Flexible peer groups - work with individual ALMO’s Contextual data - develop data analysis plan 2015 PI’s – Refresh 2014, continued consultation and development of strategic indicators. Develop client side PI’s Accuracy of data – increased resource validation Reporting – ALMO working group to review current reports and increase use of data visualisation Asset management PI’s – review within the above working group
CWAG perspective Proving VFM - is key in the context of GF cuts and the need to make savings across the council. Council’s need to review the continued advantages of the ALMO Model. HouseMark provides independent VFM check. Strategic Indicators - lack of client strategic indicators, required on a risk, cost and reputation basis. Homelessness – gap in benchmarking, P1E data how does performance impact on HRA. (TA management for example). PlanForm – Strategic HRA benchmarking tool will fill some of the gaps
Outcomes / next steps Steering Group invited to consider whether there are any relevant ‘homelessness’ PIs which would be suitable HouseMark is consulting on a proposed expansion of strategic PI set and the reintroduction of PIs which some ALMOs feel should not have been cut. HouseMark to consider specific PIs for the client- side.
CWAG response Initial feedback to HouseMark - example set of Corporate/Strategic and Service measures. Meeting with HouseMark today. Further scope and agree the client need in terms of service and strategic PI’s Continue to work in partnership with NFA and HouseMark
CIPFA Benchmarking Offer CIPFA approached by LA/ALMO/HA sector requesting an alternative benchmarking solution They have identified the need for both Strategic and Operational PI’s 3 pivotal challenges o How do we make the present business effective? o How do we ensure the future potential of our business is identified and realised? o How do we robustly prepare to make it into a different business for the future? They aim to deliver: o Analysis to compare performance against key business plan assumptions o Analysis that details the impact of strategic & operational performance on the overall business plan objectives o Analysis that is designed to be creative and flexible to quickly reflect the changing social housing environment
Steering Group discussion Require more information on the detail of the service. Concerns that a split in the sector will dilute the usefulness and robustness of available data. Concerns re data validation. Reliance on IT systems rather than people and time. Officers didn’t think the data provided would have the granularity of HouseMark data. WAIT and SEE - Preference to stay with HouseMark and get more organisations to respond and enter data in order to keep up the quality of benchmarking and the continuity of data sets.