HouseMark Benchmarking –
presentation to CWAG
Paul Edwards
Director of Data Services
6 March 2015
Agenda
• Some background to HouseMark
• Our key data outputs
 Core benchmarking
 VFM Scorecard
 Social Housing Dashboard
 Priority Performance Benchmarking
 PlanForm
• Strategic PIs
• Discussion and next steps
HouseMark history
• Founded in 1999.
• 950 member organisations including 43 ALMOs
• Leading provider of comparative cost & performance
data.
• Sector changed = refreshed service offer
Data services
Flexible
Data Input
Enhanced
Validation
Listening to
Customers
• 2 levels – in depth and priority overview
• Optional additional PI’s
• Mapping forms to assist data entry
• Optional mini modules – Welfare Reform / ASB
• Improved in year validation of Priority Performance
Benchmarking (PPB)
• Enhanced system generated checks and manual
review - 65% of customers have noticed
improvement in data quality
• Proposed update of PPB indicators following
consultation
• Evolution of services to meet customer needs PlanForm
Core Benchmarking
Understand current
VFM
• know your costs at a detailed
level
• understand costs relative to
performance
• explore what drives your costs
• self-assess VFM
Make evidence-based
decisions
• do the right things to
maximise impact of limited
resources
• do things right
• use scenarios to model
changes
• support your decisions with
evidence
Key business insight
Core Benchmarking
Core Benchmarking will enable you to:
 Make cost and performance comparisons with other
HouseMark members
 Understand your key cost drivers
 Learn from other high performing/low cost social
housing providers
7
Core Benchmarking coverage
Data – enhanced visualisation
VfM Scorecard
Beta tested in 2014
More flexible scorecard in 2015
Social Housing Dashboard
Improved quarterly priority
performance benchmarking
reporting
Social Housing Dashboard
Priority Performance
Benchmarking
• Priority Performance Benchmarking has a
quicker and easier to use data entry interface
• Reduced suite of PIs & enhanced validation
• Enhanced online reporting
Example PPB online report
Priority PIs
• 34 priority PIs collected through our core
benchmarking and PPB modules
 24 quarterly PIs
 10 annual PIs
Priority PIs
Corporate health
Percentage of staff turnover in the year
Quarterly
The average number of working days / shifts lost to the organisation due to sickness absence per employee
Quarterly
Percentage of staff satisfied with your organisation as an employer
Annual
Customer contact & complaints
Percentage of calls answered
Quarterly
Average time taken to answer inbound telephone calls (in seconds)
Quarterly
Percentage of complaints resolved at first contact
Quarterly
Major works & cyclical maintenance
Percentage of properties with a valid gas safety record at the end of the period
Quarterly
Percentage of dwellings that are non-decent at the end of the period benchmarked
Annual
Average SAP rating of self-contained owned general needs dwellings at the end of the year
Annual
Responsive repairs
Average number of calendar days taken to complete repairs
Quarterly
The percentage of repairs completed at first visit
Quarterly
Average number of repairs per property
Annual
Appointments kept as a percentage of appointments made
Quarterly
Priority PIs
Rent arrears & collection
Rent collected from current and former tenants as a percentage of rent owed (excluding arrears b/f)
Quarterly
Rent collected from current and former tenants as a percentage of the rent due (including arrears b/f)
Quarterly
Current tenant arrears as a percentage of the annual rent debit
Quarterly
Current tenant arrears net of unpaid housing benefit as a percentage of the annual rent debit
Quarterly
Former tenant arrears as a percentage of the annual rent debit
Quarterly
Current and former tenant arrears as a percentage of the annual rent debit
Quarterly
Rent written off as a percentage of rent due
Quarterly
Percentage of rent lost through dwellings being vacant
Quarterly
Number of tenants evicted due to rent arrears as a percentage of all tenancies
Quarterly
Rent collected (calculated method)
Annual
Anti-social behaviour
Percentage of ASB cases that were resolved
Quarterly
Void works & lettings
Average re-let time in days (standard re-lets)
Quarterly
Percentage of re-lets accepted on first offer
Quarterly
Percentage of properties vacant and available to let
Quarterly
Percentage of properties vacant but unavailable to let
Quarterly
Tenancy turnover of properties
Annual
Priority PIs
Satisfaction
Percentage of complainants satisfied with case handling
Annual
Percentage of residents satisfied with the most recent repair (when surveyed in accordance with the organisation's own survey format) Quarterly
Percentage of residents very or fairly satisfied with quality of new home (new build only)
Annual
Development
Standard units developed as a percentage of current stock
Annual
Affordable units developed as a percentage of current stock
Annual
PlanForm
• Real time HRA business plan comparison and analysis
•
•
•
•
•
•
tool
Information presented on an anonymised basis
Minimal data collection effort – data sourced direct from
business planning software – and real time reporting
Combined with benchmarking – a forward and
retrospective VFM tool – linking strategy to operations
Better business planning
Free subscription enhancement!
24 business plans already uploaded – on target to
achieve 50 by end of March 2015
PlanForm
Open Data Zone
• Launched at the end of September 2014 as the first instalment in our
suite of Big Data products
• In its first two months of release website had 1200 unique hits
• Created to help you
navigate through the wealth
of open data to enable you
to understand the context of
your benchmarking results
and to inform future
decisions on rent policy,
new build and managing
welfare reform
Strategic PI set
• Coverage & purpose
 Monitor ALMO effectiveness
• To what extent does existing PI set meet this
need?
 Support other strategic aims
• What additional PIs are required?
 Anything else?
Next few slides highlight possible PIs suggested by Tim Campbell from Barnet
Corporate PIs – supporting corporate priorities
Corporate Priorities
Level of Homelessness
Delivery of Affordable
Homes
Satisfaction with the
managing agent
Possible
Definition
Households in Short
term overnight
accommodation
Where in HouseMark
Benchmarking
Table 784A CLG P1E Live Tables.
Homeless households accommodated in
B&B, Shared Facilities and Self
Contained units. (Either Pending
enquiries/ found to be intentionally
homeless or where Sectn 193 Duty is
owed)
This is a key financial risk to the Council
Additional Homes
provided on HRA land
Benchmarking is not well developed.
This is a key deliverable in helping to
reduce Homeless costs and meet
strategic targets
tenant satisfaction with
overall service
provided
Housemark.
Measure of overall resident satisfaction.
It is a reputational issue for the Council
as a landlord.
Collected via annual CORE
benchmarking and via STAR specialist
benchmarking
Key PIs – supporting strategic service aims
Service Area
Possible
Definition
Homelessness
Families B&B
accommodation for more
than 6 weeks
Homelessness
Total Number of cases
where homelessness
was prevented and
relieved
Homelessness
The proportion of all
homeless households
accommodated in B&B,
Shared Facilities and Self
Contained units pending
enquiries or found to be
intentionally homeless
Benchmarking
DCLG P1E returns
Families in B&B for more than 6
weeks is a
reputational and legal risk to the
Council
P1e Returns
This measures the ability of the
provider to manage the Homeless
caseload and prevent placing
people in Temporary
Accommodation, and reduce the
financial risk to the Council.
Table 784A CLG Live Tables
(Extract). This measures the ability
of the provider to manage homeless
applications and efficiently
discharge the Council’s duty to
house thus reducing the
financial risk to the Council.
Where in HouseMark
Key PIs – supporting strategic service aims
Service Area
Lettings
Possible
Definition
average time taken to
re-let standard voids
Benchmarking
Where in HouseMark
HouseMark
This is an important efficiency
measure. Reputation/Financial
risk to Council.
Core BM & PPB - Quarterly
Excludes major works voids.
Major Works Voids
Income Collection
Leasehold Income
Collection
Percentage of dwellings
that are vacant but
unavailable to let - GN
& HfOP
Rent collected as a
percentage of rent due
(including arrears
brought forward)
Leasehold service
charges collected as a
percentage of service
charges due
HouseMark.
This indicator measures the
number of properties vacant but
unavailable for letting,
Reputational/financial risk to the
council
HouseMark.
This measures the ability of the
service provider to effectively and
efficiently manage the income
collection service, and reduce the
financial risk to the Council.
Core BM & PPB - Quarterly
HouseMark.
This measures the ability of the
service provider to effectively and
efficiently manage the income
collection service, and reduce the
financial risk to the Council.
Core BM - Annual
Core BM & PPB - Quarterly
Key PIs – supporting strategic service aims
Service Area
Arrears
Repairs
Estate Management
Statutory Services
Possible
Definition
Temporary Accommodation
arrears as percentage of
debit
tenant satisfaction with how
landlord deals with repairs
and maintenance
tenant satisfaction with
neighbourhood
Percentage of dwellings with
a valid gas safety certificate
Benchmarking
Local Indicator. No Comparative data
This measures the ability of the service
provider to effectively and efficiently
manage the income collection service, and
reduce the
financial risk to the Council
Housemark.
This is a key measure of whether the
service provider provides a good repairs
and maintenance service from the tenant’s
perspective. It is a
reputational issue for the Council as a
landlord.
Housemark.
This is a key measure of whether the
service provider provides a good grounds
maintenance and communal repairs
service from the tenant’s perspective.
It is a reputational issue for the Council as
a landlord.
Housemark.
This measures the ability of the service
provider to ensure that the annual safety
check has been completed, when due, and
reduce the
legal and reputational risk to the Council.
Where in HouseMark
Core BM – Annual (HouseMark require that
surveys are no more than two years old for
benchmarking purposes)
Core BM – Annual (HouseMark require that
surveys are no more than two years old for
benchmarking purposes)
Core BM – Annual – note we have
amended this PI to read: ‘Percentage of
properties that require a gas safety record
which had a gas safety check and record
completed’
Key PIs – supporting strategic service aims
Service Area
Decent Homes
Energy Efficiency
Customer Experience
Customer Experience
Possible
Definition
% of properties failing to
meet the decent homes
standard
average SAP rating
Benchmarking
Where in HouseMark
Housemark.
This measures the ability of the
service provider to deliver an asset
management strategy that reduces
the
legal and reputational risk to the
Council.
Housemark.
This measures the ability of the
service provider to deliver an asset
management strategy that reduces
the
legal and reputational risk to the
Council.
Core BM & PPB - Annual
calls resolved at first
contact
Housemark.
This measures the ability of the
service provider to deliver a good
customer experience
reputational risk to the Council.
% complaints resolved at
first contact
Housemark.
This measures the ability of the
service provider to deliver a good
customer experience
reputational risk to the Council.
Core BM & PPB - Annual
We don’t measure calls resolved at first
contact: we measure % of calls
answered – CORE & PPB – Quarterly
and average time taken to answer
inbound telephone calls (in seconds) –
CORE & PPB - Quarterly
Core & PPB - Quarterly
Discussion and next steps
Key considerations
• Are these the right PIs?
 Numbers
 Coverage
• Can the information be sourced?
• Is there an appetite for collection?
• Frequency of collection?
Thank you for listening
Contact details:
[email protected]
07841 861974