What is to be done?

Everyone who works in a Housing Association seems to be a bit overwhelmed at the moment.

Whether they are grappling with building safety; reaching net zero, reviewing complaints or trying to avoid another maladministration ruling, – the demands they face are intense and varied.

Looking at it with great empathy, but also with a little distance, I think there are some fundamental issues at play. Rather than grappling with hundreds of seemingly unrelated issues, or being a victim to other people’s agendas, we need to go upstream and work out what to do.

Most of the issues we face arise from a long-term failure to invest adequately in our homes. Despite less than 1% of associations failing the so-called Decent Homes Standard, it is clear to see that a good proportion of homes are sub-standard. Over decades, we accepted that instead of investing in existing homes we would use our surpluses to build new homes. I have been there and done that. So over time more and more homes fall into disrepair – and until we get solicitor letters, we tend to ignore tenant demands. Instead, we do a “responsive” repair that literally papers over the cracks, or paints over the mould.

The sector needs to work out, in truth, how many homes are not good enough and create a plan to address this. Quite a lot of money will be needed to make every home safe, warm, modern and energy efficient. We owe it to the powers that be to publish this figure and we have to campaign ferociously, on behalf of our residents, to get hold of sufficient funds.

As well as putting value back into our homes we need good information which is another key problem. The data we have on our stock is inaccurate and difficult to access. Thoughtful and creative planning is impossible. In fact, associations which have been successful in receiving even small Government grants for stock improvement (such as the Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund) rarely have a reliable idea of where, why and exactly how much money they plan to spend on each of their homes.

Money and data are needed but absent, and there is a third essential, missing element – resident involvement. Every resident knows what is wrong with their home and they are generally keen to communicate this. They can tell us ‘where the shoe pinches’. One in four social tenants is dissatisfied with the condition of their home (according to the English Housing Survey). But instead of co-opting them to help survey their home, we complain that they keep bringing up their “own issues” at resident meetings.

Finally, there is the issue of our organisational structures and culture.

Associations have a disastrous fissure between the tenancy management officers and the property management teams. These two departments work independently with different budgets, time frames, policies, and accountabilities. The needs of people are segregated from the needs of the home and frequently the customer facing teams respond to complaints without a full picture of the source of the problem, the history of the property, the investment plan, the attributes and deficiencies of the home or the block. Technology could help to bridge this divide, but only once associations start to seriously consider how these two teams can become interdependent rather than segregated.

It is time to take control of our narrative, our assets, our relationships and our future. For associations that feel so weighed down by everyone else’s priorities t’s a big ask. But we need to step up and take control of our own destiny, or else others will write it for us.

I explore these issues in more depth in my White Paper Social Housing.…