Key Determinants of Performance in the Scottish Housing Association Sector

1. Key Determinants of Performance in the Scottish Housing Association Sector Daniel Pace, PhD Researcher, Department of Urban Studies, University of Glasgow

2. Aims of Social Housing • Social justice • ‘a decent home for all at a price they can afford’ • Economic rationales • Counter market failure – affordability and supply • Counter effects of residulaisation • Regeneration – housing and wider challenges • Mixed communities? • Meet challenges of current and future tenant base – younger and more vulnerable? – more options needed but finance limited

3. Why housing associations? • Avoid perceived ‘public sector failure’ • More entrepreneurial and innovative – but independence compromised by levels of regulation? • More locally-focussed and responsive to service users • Recent studies have shown housing associations to be better performers than local authority landlords (Scottish Government, 2009)

4. Scotland’s Housing Association Sector • 217 RSLs • 270,000 homes and 5,000 bedspaces • Different types of association • Community-based (80% of HAs have less than 2,000 units – 1/3 of total stock) • National (operating in several areas) • Stock transfer • Specialist (providing for elderly and disabled persons) • Investment programme for 2010/11 - £471 million

5. Scotland’s Housing Association Sector 2 • Regulated by the Scottish Housing Regulator (SHR) • Single regulator for LAs and HAs • No more cyclical inspections for HAs • Performance standards to be revised – Scottish Social Housing Charter • Other regulators include Care Commission, Charities Regulator,local authorities (particularly in Edinburgh and Glasgow) • Subject to Scottish Government targets – 2015: quality standard (including emissions), 2012: homelessness target

6. Perspectives on performance:1. New Public Management • Introduced by Thatcher governments to address perceived deficiencies in public service delivery • Main approaches • Increased management control of budgets, benchmarking, transfer of power to managers and service users • Decentralisation of services – e.g. stock transfer • HA sector: regulation, performance returns, internal performance management and benchmarking – overall aims = efficiency, effectiveness & economy • …but do PIs reflect tenants’ actual experiences?

7. Perspectives on performance:2. Government Policy Aims • Increase supply of affordable housing – difficult in current climate – some innovations in finance • High levels of public subsidy (£471M 2010/11) – need for effective regulation • Ensure that properties meet quality and emissions standards – SHQS by 2015 • Address concerns regarding the performance and efficiency of RSLs (SHR, 2009) • HAs used as vehicles for wider regeneration of disadvantaged communities – set to increase in the future?

8. Perspectives on performance:3. Private Finance • Need to meet borrowing repayments – HAs forced to work within budgets • Need to secure new/continued borrowing – HAs forced to demonstrate efficiency – business plans • Lenders a stakeholder and a determinant of performance • Effective regulation needed to ensure continued access to lending

9. Perspectives on performance:4. Tenants • Performance means delivering on tenant priorities – quality, repairs, tackling ASB • Performance vital as lack of supply/choice limits tenants’ ability to choose another provider – cannot therefore be seen as true ‘consumers’ • Should be seen as citizens – this requires… • Opportunities for participation? • Discontinuity?: HAs report difficulties in fostering tenant involvement but studies show tenants are interested in participation(McKee, 2008) • more than just opportunities to become board members

10. Framework of performance 1 • Aim not to create an ‘ideal type’ HA that meets all performance goals • Framework designed to set out what is required from the sector as a whole • Housing management • Innovation and success in managing issues including repairs, rent arrears, ASB • Development and quality • Innovations in financing and developing/improving stock – finance, partnerships and mergers

11. Framework of performance 2 • Wider regeneration • Involvement in successful and inclusive community projects and services • Tenant involvement • Innovative and successful ways of involving and consulting tenants regarding housing and other services (including co-op model) • Efficiency • Successful performance monitoring and benchmarking • Innovations in customer service

12. Determinants of Performance? • Policy – including HAG system – more competition needed? • Regulation – effectiveness of new system? • Private lenders • Tenants – delivering on priorities - consultation and participation • Housing associations – good practice and innovation • Size and organisational type? – smaller orgs (better performance) vs larger orgs (economies of scale) – worth considering?

13. Key Literature • Hills Review, 2007 • Malpass, 2005 • Newhaven Research, 2006 • Walker & Murie, Housing Studies, 2004 • Scottish Government: Firm Foundations, 2007 & tenant priorities study, 2009 • SHR, Shaping up for improvement, 2009 • Whitehead, in Gibb & O’Sullivan, 2003 • Previous reviews of performance • Generally comparisons between LSVT orgs and former landlords (LAs, Scottish Homes etc) • E.g. Pawson et al, JRF, 2009

14. Discussion • What about my Framework of Performance? – too wide? • Any other literature that may be helpful to my study? • Methods • Case studies of different types of association? – include focus groups with tenants? • Survey and statistical analysis of larger number of HAs? • Alternative methods?