+ All Categories
Home > Documents > (DRAFT) - Enfield bid.pdf(DRAFT) 2 (a) Summary sheet 1. Local Authority London Borough of Enfield 2....

(DRAFT) - Enfield bid.pdf(DRAFT) 2 (a) Summary sheet 1. Local Authority London Borough of Enfield 2....

Date post: 20-Mar-2020
Category:
Upload: others
View: 6 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
57
ENFIELD HOMES ARMS LENGTH MANAGEMENT ORGANISATION BID FOR FUNDING MARCH 2006 (DRAFT)
Transcript

ENFIELD HOMES

ARMS LENGTH MANAGEMENT ORGANISATION BID FOR FUNDING MARCH 2006

(DRAFT)

2

(a) Summary sheet

1. Local Authority

London Borough of Enfield

2. Name of ALMO (if decided) Enfield Homes

3. Will the ALMO manage all or part of the LA’s stock?

All

4. If only part of the stock, name of the area(s) covered

_____

5. If only part of the stock, the % of the LA’s total housing stock

_____

6. Number of tenanted properties to be managed by the ALMO

11,949

7. Number of leasehold properties to be managed by the ALMO

4,518

8. Total number of properties to be managed by the ALMO: (Q6+Q7)

16,467

9. Number (and %) of properties currently failing the decent homes standard

3224 (27%) at 31

st October 2005

10. Date by which all properties would meet the decent homes target with ALMO funding

31st December 2010

11. Total ALMO bid (£m) and breakdown by year

To come from spreadsheet

12. Average investment per dwelling To come from spreadsheet

13. Timing and results of LA BV reviews to date

Housing Management services October 2003 1 star promising prospects for improvement Repairs and Maintenance service April 2005 1 star promising prospects for improvement

14. Timing of planned LA BV reviews We are working with HQN to look at areas for improvement in Housing Management and develop a service improvement plan to take us to a 2 star rating. As part of the review, we are looking at the current staffing structures and remodelling them to focus on improving front line service services in line with tenant priorities and increasing value for money.

15. Timing of ALMO inspection October - November 2007 as agreed with our Lead Inspector

16. How tenant support has been/will be demonstrated (e.g. ballot/survey and dates)

Test of opinion postal survey during stock options appraisal process. This was followed by face-to-face

3

survey carried out by ITA to test knowledge of decision and support for the outcome. 869 tenants were interviewed of whom 68% were in favour of the decision. 7% were definitely opposed and 25% weren’t sure. The developing ALMO will seek to increase the percentage of residents supporting the decision, through a series of awareness raising and information giving events and activities such as road shows, telephone surveys and focus groups. These will also be used to involve residents in the development of the resident involvement strategy and the service improvement plan to take the services to a 2 star rating.

17. Number of TMOs (if any) and number of properties covered by each

There are currently no TMOs in Enfield. However the fact that choosing the ALMO option still left the way open for the future development of TMOs was a factor in making the decision

18. Brief details of structure if group structure or more than one ALMO is proposed (e.g. 2 ALMOs, 4 Area Boards)

A single ALMO is proposed, with initially one main board, developing local area boards as the ALMO matures.

19. Expected date of section 27 application

July 2006

20. Name, address, phone and e-mail contact details of lead local authority officer

Mike Culligan AD for Housing Management and Sustainable Communities Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY 020 8379 4575 [email protected]

21. Name, address, phone and e-mail contact details of lead officer for the ALMO (if decided)

Not yet decided.

22. Name and address of the Council’s Chief Executive

Rob Leak Civic Centre

4

Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

23. Name and address of the Leader of the Council

Cllr Michael Rye Conservative Group Office c/o Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XQ

24. Name(s) of local MP(s) and constituency

David Burrowes Southgate Andy Love Edmonton Joan Ryan Enfield North

5

(b) Options Appraisal Our stock options appraisal process formally began in February 2004 with the appointment of a project manager to lead the process. However, we had carried out initial consultation with residents about their aspirations for their homes and priorities for service development in early Autumn 2003. This led to the development of the ‘Enfield Homes standard’, which includes areas not covered by the Decent Homes standard such as additional lighting and environmental improvements. A stakeholder steering group comprising tenants, leaseholders, elected Members and senior officers oversaw the stock options appraisal process. The steering Group was responsible for ensuring that a robust and thorough appraisal of the options available took place and making the final recommendation to Cabinet for the preferred option for the future management of the councils housing stock. Solon Community Network acted as Independent Tenant Advisor, supporting tenants and leaseholders on the steering group, co-ordinating meetings of the wider stakeholder group and carrying out consultation and awareness raising activities to complement the work of the project team. Housing Quality Network provided financial support and guidance as well as an external challenge to the assumptions made in assessing the resources needed and available to deliver the Decent Homes Standard. They presented information to stakeholder steering group through the decision making process, enabling the group to eliminate non-viable options. Throughout the process we worked in partnership with the Community Housing Task Force to ensure that the process met the requirements of the Options Guidance. The Task Force representative attended a number of stakeholder steering group meetings and meetings of the wider stakeholder group. The initial stage of the project was to raise awareness of the stock options appraisal process and what the decision could mean for residents. We carried out a variety of activities to engage with our residents, gather their opinions and inform them about the options available to them. These activities included road shows across the borough, poster campaigns using buses and fixed sites for display, adverts in local newspaper, articles in our tenants’ newsletter as well as special ‘options appraisal’ editions of the newsletter and an information day at the Civic Centre. At a further ‘away day’, we used game show formats to increase understanding, with ‘Blind Date’ contestants picking ALMO as the best option. Initial assessment of the options based on robust stock condition data and financial assessment of resources available ruled out our ability to meet the Decent Homes standard without additional funding. Whole stock transfer was

6

ruled out partly because the overhanging debt was felt to be too high to make this viable. Whilst further financial assessment was carried out of the two remaining options, ALMO or a mixture of retention and transfer, we carried out a test of opinion among residents as to their preferred option. This was carried out by means of a postal questionnaire inviting tenants and leaseholders to rank the options in terms of preference and to state reasons for these preferences if they wished. The results came back equally divided between three options, the two offered, plus a third option which a number of tenants expressed as ‘stay as we are’. Stakeholder steering group decided that in light of this result and the detailed financial assessment, the best option for the future management of the stock was to recommend that the council set up an ALMO. Cabinet agreed the steering group’s recommendation at it’s meeting of June 13

th

and in October agreed a further report outlining the proposals for implementation of the decision. Both reports are attached at Appendix XXX. The Government Office for London signed off the stock options appraisal report in December 2005 and a copy of the sign off letter is attached at Appendix XXX. The management of FECA (Federation Of Enfield Community Associations) agreed at their meeting of xxxxxx to support the Cabinet decision. See letter of support attached as Appendix xxx A further consultation exercise was carried out by our ITA SOLON in July 2005 to establish the level of support for the ALMO decision. This took the form of a door-to-door questionnaire survey carried out across the borough. A total of 869 questionnaires were completed and of these, 69% were in favour of the ALMO, with only 7% actively opposed. A copy of the full findings is attached at Appendix xxxxx (c) Scheme outline A single ALMO is proposed, initially with one main board of 18. 6 tenant leaseholder member, 6 council nominations and 6 independent members. The aim is to develop local area boards as the ALMO matures, utilising the current Community Housing Partnership boards as the template for these. The structure of the stock to be managed by the ALMO, taking into account the current pattern and rates of right to buy sales, will see a total stock figure of 16,467 of which 11,949 dwellings will be tenanted and 4,518 dwellings will be leasehold or part of shared ownership arrangements. The stock has been further broken down in the tables below to show the build up and pattern of the stock that the ALMO will manage.

7

Profiling By Archetype. In setting out the stock by the 13 common archetypes the pattern and spread of the stock is shown in table C1.

Number of units which are

Archetype Total

Number

% of total stock

Pre - 1945

1945 to

1964

1965 to

1974

Post -

1974

Tenanted Stock

Houses Small Terraced Pre 1945

473 2.9 473

Houses Semi detached Pre 1945

709 4.3 709

Houses Other Pre 1945 892 5.4 892

Houses Small Terraced 1945 – 1964

130 0.8 130

Houses Semi detached and Large Terrace 1945 – 1964

675 4.1 675

Houses 1965 – 1974 318 1.9 318

Houses Post 1974 29 0.3 29

Non Traditional Houses 171 1.0 101 70

Bungalows 103 0.6 12 74 17

Low – Rise Flats Pre 1945 288 1.7 288

Low – Rise Flats Post 1945 1410 8.6 580 252 578

Medium – Rise Flats 3952 24.0 131 1392 1852 577

High – Rise Flats 2799 17.0 348 2451

Sub Totals 11949 2505 3300 4960 1184

Leased Stock

Low – Rise Flats Pre 1945 104 0.6 104

Low – Rise Flats Post 1945 385 2.3 216 98 71

Medium – Rise Flats 3275 19.9 36 1291 1592 356

High – Rise Flats 754 4.6 169 585

Sub Totals 4518 140 1676 2275 427

Totals 16467 2645 4976 7235 1611

Table C1. Stock by Archetype. Profiling of stock by location. The stock to be managed by the ALMO will primarily be located within the London Borough of Enfield, and will include three estates located outside of the Borough. The location of stock is demonstrated through grouping by postal sectors and is shown in figure C2 and confirms that the ALMO stock will have a major impact on areas of social deprivation and low family incomes. The additional funding of the Capital programme which the ALMO will be able to

8

attract will impact favourably on these communities through re-engineering of homes to be fuel efficient, of a low maintenance profile, ergonomically and economically suited to modern living. Combined with the ability to further invest in the priorities that residents that have identified through the consultation processes which created, developed and provided the Enfield Homes Standard we are confident that the ALMO will deliver effective, vibrant and socially inclusive estates and homes which will be respected and valued machines for sustaining and inspiring the community to grow, strengthen and achieve its full potential at all levels.

POSTAL SECTOR Number of units in

Management Percentage of total stock in Management

EN1 2762 16.8

EN2 1250 7.6

EN3 3818 23.2

EN4 91 0.6

EN6 160 1.0

EN8 613 3.7

N11 764 4.6

N13 546 3.3

N14 877 5.3

N18 2455 14.9

N21 230 1.4

N9 2901 17.6

Figure C2 Profiling of stock by condition. Of the 11,949 tenanted dwellings to be managed by the ALMO it is anticipated that the condition of the stock in respect of the Decent Homes Standard will be as shown in table C3.

9

Condition.

Number of dwellings at 1

st April

2006

Decent. 4706

Requiring works to prevent non-decency in the next three years. 1315

Requiring works to prevent non-decency in the next five years. 1133

Requiring works to prevent non-decency in the next ten years. 1672

Requiring works to make the dwelling decent. 3123

Table C3. Profiling by condition Appendix XX shows an analysis of dwellings requiring work by ward and also shows the 2004 Indices of Deprivation by ward. The table shows that broadly speaking the highest percentages of non-decent dwellings are in those wards with the highest levels of multiple deprivation. This means that the Council will be investing the highest levels of funding in the areas that are most deprived. (d) ALMO funding required

Comments and qualifications are within square brackets thus: [comment]. The information is still the subject of discussions with HQN

To achieve the Decent Homes target across our stock, we will require ALMO funding of £X. This includes [5% of £X] for works designed to enhance the sustainability of our investment in Decent Homes (see Appendix XX for a breakdown of the 5% sustainability element of the bid). Sustainability is further discussed in part (f) of this bid.

Table X sets out the profile of the annual expenditure required to achieve the DHS and indicates the annual funding gap up to 2010/11. The desired additional investment per dwelling is £Y. The income, expenditure and investment figures are drawn from the Building Cost Model, at Appendix X.

The analysis of our Decent Homes funding requirements is based on our stock condition data and programmes of investment, which are discussed in part (e) of this bid. We have applied checks on the accuracy of the base information and costings as discussed more fully in part (e), and are confident of the validity and accuracy of these inputs into the model.

10

As part of our robust business planning, programming and monitoring procedures we continually review our stock data to ensure that predictions are accurate and reflective of the most recent data and trends. By doing this we ensure that aspirations of residents are turned into realistic and practical achievables. The affect of this continual monitoring and programming process has inevitably advanced our data and hence the information and figures provided in this document, although reflective of the Options Appraisal process and the out turn report arising therefrom, are now representative of the position we have model from 1st April 2006.

Year Investment programme

Resources available

(see table Y)

Funding gap

ALMO funding required

Inflation

ALMO funding required

after inflation

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

2009/10

2010/11

Total

Table X (HQN TO PROVIDE FIGURES TO POPULATE AND SET BIDDING STRATEGY)

The resources available to us to meet the investment programme are set out in table Y.

Year MRA £000s

Capital receipts £000s

Other £000s

Total resources available

£000s

2006/07 8,972 4,121 13,093

2007/08 8,893 5,721 14,614

2008/09 8,835 5,721 14,556

2009/10 8,791 5,721 14,512

2010/11 8,758 5,721 14,479

Total 44,249 27,005 71,254

Table Y (HQN TO CONFIRM FIGURES AND SET BIDDING STRATEGY)

The proposed ALMO structure is dynamic and foreward thinking, it will explore the market place to keep abreast of actual and potential additional funding opportunities. The ALMO will continue to take up the benefits of energy efficiency

11

grants through EEC funding and will continue to develop the successful relationship with our current utility partner, British Gas. The ALMO will search out the additional funding and cost sharing opportunities from London’s successful Olympic bid.

The stock will be reviewed through an active and continuous asset management strategy. This will ensure that the stock profile meets the needs of the community and will include the expansion of existing dwellings, where feasible and appropriate, to provide larger family supportive units and hence maximising short term funding opportunities and longer term asset income and strengthening of the economic profile of the community.

Beyond the immediacy of the needs of the ALMO’s stock the ALMO has identified areas of the business to be developed through partnering and marketing of services and skills to neighbouring organisations whereby cost sharing and cost mitigation will strengthen the business stance and funding available to the ALMO. The dynamics of the ALMO will see this process extend through the risk analysis of the services provided and delivered. (e) Decent homes delivery Our stock condition database is based on a borough-wide stock survey where the initial data set was captured and modeled by NBA Consortium Services Ltd (NBA) through site surveys undertaken in 1999. We have since had this updated and refined on at least an annual basis in accordance with industry best practice. This has included: � inputting the findings of our programme of more detailed surveys of specific

parts of the stock (e.g. abseiling surveys of high-rise blocks, lifts survey) � updating records on completion of works � ongoing validity checks � analysis of reactive maintenance information � removal of properties sold freehold In addition the stock condition survey was subject to a mid term rates reappraisal by an independent external quantity surveyor. This task was undertaken in 2002 by Pellings. We consider the information currently held on the database to be sufficiently robust to allow a true assessment to be made of the condition of our stock and its

12

investment needs. In particular it enables us to accurately assess the number of current and potential non-decent homes and the cost to make and maintain them decent. The Community Housing Task Force commented in 2004 that the database was “…a good survey, well maintained and understood by in-house staff” and “…an adequate foundation for the Options Appraisal exercise”. A further complete survey will be carried out in 2006 to provide additional information, such as the Health and Safety rating, and hone information on decent homes for the years beyond 2010. Stock profile

As detailed in section C, it is anticipated that at 1st April 2006 our stock will consist of 16,467 properties of which 11,949 will be rented and 4,518 will be leasehold. Well over 70% of properties are flats or maisonettes. Approximately 30% of these are in high-rise blocks (6 storeys or over) and approximately 36% of the flats are of non-traditional construction. The proportion of high-rise and non-traditionally constructed flats is high compared to the other outer London Boroughs. Over 50% of the stock was built since 1965. Around 8% of the stock is designated sheltered. Stock Condition Whilst the overall condition of the stock is fair and has benefited from a programme of investment tackling the majority of the major structural repair and improvement needs of the stock, there is a need for a significant level of investment: to catch up on some basic fabric repair works, keep pace with the growing maintenance demands of an ageing stock and provide for projected future maintenance needs. Standards of Accommodation A significant proportion of the stock fails to meet present day basic standards of accommodation and amenity: whilst the vast majority of dwellings benefit from central heating system and satisfactory insulation, the levels of appointment in terms of kitchen and bathroom fittings are often below present day expectations, and some older properties require the modernisation of plan layouts. £XX has been identified as required to carry out the improvements necessary to raise the stock to a basic level of appointment and amenity that would meet the benchmark standards identified.

13

Energy Efficiency At the 1

st April 2005 the average SAP energy efficiency rating of 63 is

significantly higher than the national average for Council housing in the UK (note that we review the energy efficiency data on an annual basis at the end of each financial year) and the intended programme of upgrade works will see the average rating continuing to improve by at least one point per annum.

Decent Homes

With the current programmes of work in train and taking into account other trends which will impact on the stock we anticipate that at 1

st April 2006 some 3,123

properties ( 26% of the tenanted stock) will fail the Decent Homes standard, with a further 4,120 (34%) at risk of becoming non-decent by 2011.

Table Z sets out the Decent Homes position by stock type and district, indicating the numbers of properties failing the different parts of the DHS. The districts referred to in Table Z are those into which the housing stock is currently divided and these districts will be used to define the areas within which the strategic partnering contracts for the delivery of the decent homes programme will be set out.

District Archetype

East Edmonton West Totals

Houses Small Terraced <1945

Poor Condition 45 10 31 86

Poor Facilities 1 0 0 1

Poor Thermal Comfort 12 1 13 26

Potential 149 107 54 310

Houses Semi Detached <1945

Poor Condition 20 11 28 59

Poor Facilities 4 0 0 4

Poor Thermal Comfort 3 4 11 18

Potential 107 317 12 436

Houses Other <1945

Poor Condition 30 23 75 128

Poor Facilities 6 1 5 12

Poor Thermal Comfort 17 5 72 94

Potential 286 81 148 515

14

Houses Small Terraced 1945 - 1964

Poor Condition 46 6 13 65

Poor Facilities 0 0 0 0

Poor Thermal Comfort 8 0 0 8

Potential 20 3 34 57

Houses Semi Detached and Large Terrace 1945 - 1964

Poor Condition 159 19 192 370

Poor Facilities 0 0 0 0

Poor Thermal Comfort 7 2 1 10

Potential 193 4 99 296

Houses 1965 - 1974

Poor Condition 5 3 4 12

Poor Facilities 0 0 0 0

Poor Thermal Comfort 11 0 1 12

Potential 96 5 17 118

Non - Traditional Houses

Poor Condition 30 7 43 80

Poor Facilities 0 0 0 0

Poor Thermal Comfort 0 1 9 10

Potential 19 0 6 25

Bungalows

Poor Condition 10 15 32 57

Poor Facilities 0 0 0 0

Poor Thermal Comfort 0 0 0 0

Potential 7 30 3 40

Low Rise Flats Pre 1945

Poor Condition 9 5 19 33

Poor Facilities 0 0 1 1

Poor Thermal Comfort 1 4 7 12

Potential 36 41 84 161

Low Rise Flats Post 1945

Poor Condition 26 65 97 188

Poor Facilities 13 5 0 18

Poor Thermal Comfort 10 6 10 26

Potential 154 109 244 507

15

Medium Rise Flats

Poor Condition 117 265 301 683

Poor Facilities 0 22 21 43

Poor Thermal Comfort 92 24 135 251

Potential 470 384 451 1305

High Rise Flats

Poor Condition 0 30 0 30

Poor Facilities 0 0 0 0

Poor Thermal Comfort 514 142 130 786

Potential 37 195 118 350

Totals 2770 1952 2521 7243

Table Z. Works required to address non-decency by Archetype and district.

Investment needs and procurement methods

The Council has developed the Building Cost Model (BCM) with the assistance and validation of Housing Quality Network HQN), building on the analysis carried out for the stock options appraisal in early 2005.

Costs reported within this document and the accompanying BCM are based on the rates and items of work identified through the stock condition survey database. The external appraisal process applied to these rates, as undertaken by Pellings, brought the rate costs up to a base position of April 2003. The costs reported throughout this document have utilised the Tender Price Index (TPI) as recognised by the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors as the means of profiling future expenditure requirements. The TPI has therefore been used to uplift the costs from the April 2003 mark to represent the position as at April 2006 this figure has been adjusted further to allow for the London locational factor.

We are confident that the base position of the rates included in the stock condition survey database are suitable, representative of actual expenditure requirements, and sufficient to predict expenditure needs. In addition through the Options Appraisal process the rates were subject of further external test by HQN to confirm that they were fit for purpose.

We continue to appraise the rates included in the stock condition survey by market testing through comparing the rates and scheme costs with consultant feasibilities and competitive tendering. Recent comparisons being tabled below (table E0):

16

Table E0: Recent tender comparisons to stock condition survey rates.

The comparisons offered in table E0 underline the robustness of the rates installed within the stock condition survey database. The schemes listed in table E0 are a number of major works projects tendered over the last year, and these figures confirm that efficiencies have been sought through the packaging of works, timing and targeting of the contracts. This approach will be maintained and further efficiencies are anticipated to be realised through the use of streamlined procurement which will be developed through the strategic and project-partnering arrangements scheduled to be effective from 1st April 2007.

It should be noted that the schemes shown in table E0 are projects that involve a large number of units hence achieving economies of scale in the values of contracts. Therefore it must be appreciated that although the table would indicate that the rates are overly high, it must be held in mind that the rates relate back to the isolated element of work or item to receive work and hence when examined in this context such economies as demonstrated through table E0 will not apply.

The stock condition survey database has been modeled to provide an investment programme based around the following eight criteria points.

1. Health & Safety and other statutory landlords responsibilities. 2. Structural Repairs.

3. Decent Homes.

Scheme Stock Condition Survey Estimate

Successful Tender

Difference Variance

Elsinge Estate 1,915,931.28 1,915,649.00 282.28 0.01%

Baker Street & Cheviot 1,581,898.80 1,509,608.46 72,290.34 4.57%

Bounces Road Estate 1,006,794.48 1,274,344.00 (267,549.52) (26.57%)

Potters Bar Windows 787,398.48 521,321.00 266,077.48 33.79%

Cuckhoo Hall Lane Windows

749,659.68 507,485.77 242,173.91 32.30%

Brookbank 1,168,278.24 730,193.67 438,084.57 37.50%

Auckland & Dendridge 2,589,430.64 1,559,297.00 1,030,133.64 39.78%

Moree Way Heating 224,611.20 155,648.39 68,962.81 30.70%

Edmonton Area Heating 308,404.80 213,438.00 94,966.80 30.79%

17

4. Energy efficiency through roof renewals / insulation works.

5. Windows. Replacement with double glazed units.

6. Grouping of external / envelope works to achieve economies of scale

(using two year spacing from any element as the catchment criteria).

7. Our energy rating target remains as being an overall increase of 1 point across all stock required each year therefrom (for any SAP base).

8. Boiler replacement and heating upgrades. We wish to reduce our

maintenance costs and improve efficiency of heating systems therefore we are targeting the under-floor electrically heated dwellings and those with warm air systems in addition to incomplete central heating systems and those central heating systems served by a back boiler, and hence we would expect programmes of work to reflect this.

The modeling applied in this document takes due account of the efficiencies, cost savings and programme control benefits that are expected, over time, to accrue from adopting Egan compliant procurement methods, particularly the commitment to enter into partnering framework agreements and the utilisation of local procurement consortia. We recognise the work being carried out by ODPM in enabling a network of such consortia to be set up and managed and we are eager to facilitate and maximise the clear benefits of such an arrangement on suppliers and purchasers and also on the wider local community [local suppliers, local job market]. Procurement

A new and comprehensive housing asset management and procurement strategy is in place developed in line with the Council’s corporate procurement strategy, which follows the recommendations in the Byatt and Gershon reports. The Council is fully committed to a professional and cross-departmental approach to procurement. We have a Procurement Board, chaired by the lead member for Procurement, which will monitor progress and drive organization behaviours to achieve efficiency savings in order to invest in front line services. This is backed up by a collaborative procurement community through the introduction of Procurement Centres of Excellence and procurement champions as outlined below.

18

This type of organisational structure is designed to encourage collaboration, conformity and contributes to the improvement of service delivery.

This structure will support the ALMO organization by:

a. Providing corporate lead strategy and a focal point for governance/guidance

b. Supporting devolved procurement activity through Centres of Expertise

c. Providing the opportunity for collaboration, sharing of best practice and knowledge

d. Developing and promoting procurement expertise and competence

e. Raising the profile of procurement activity within the Council until it is truly recognised as a strategic operation

f. Focus on delivering the Council’s strategic goals and Service Area objectives.

Our corporate procurement team, assisted by external specialist consultancies and supported by the committed and dynamic ALMO staff, will help to ensure that we keep abreast of this rapidly developing field and that the implications and impact of the necessary changes will be properly and fully analysed, managed and controlled.

Service Area

External

Knowledge & Best Practice

eg CIPS

Internal

Knowledge & Best Practice

THE PROCUREMENT

NETWORK

Definition

Guidance

Collaborate

Control

Delivery Accountability S

ervice Area

Corporate

Shared Contract, Supplier and Performance Data

Strategic Procurement Team

Service Area Service Area

19

Proposed programmes of work

Within the investment programme set out in table X, the sustainable element of our decent homes works will see extensive capital investment in the stock which is quantified in table E1.

Work Area Number of units

Bathroom upgrades 2396

Heating upgrades 4670

Chimney repairs 215

Doors 158

Insulation improvements 1306

Kitchen upgrades 4728

Rewires & electrical upgrades 3536

Roof repairs & renewals 1781

Structural repairs 110

Windows 2917

Table E1.

In conjunction with our key stakeholders, including residents and contractors, the Council has adopted a partnership charter which will “deliver the Enfield Council responsive and planned works to achieve the mutually agreed targets for constant improvement and support to the local community. We will do this by working as a team within a trusting open environment through communication, cooperation, co-ordination and mutual respect.”

A major advantage of long term partnering and collective procurement practices is the ability to smooth capital works programmes and so provide clear demand signals to the supply market and thereby help avoid the risk of overheating and inflationary pressures. We have smoothed the expenditure profile accordingly in our previous stock condition survey models, and this practice will be continued to see programmes of works balanced between need and resources available. The setting and delivery of such programmes of work will be based around the following key drivers: a) Addressing risks The overall level of activity in the housing construction and maintenance industry is difficult to predict with any degree of certainty over the medium term. Known factors that are likely to have a significant effect are the lead up to the Olympics,

20

regional decent homes and house building targets, but uncertainties – such as variations in the level of market activity as a result of changes in the economy, unforeseeable influences and policy changes – are less easy to assess. We recognise the need for flexibility in the programme to respond to the effects of such outside influences, and also to adapt to the possibility that funding may not be available at the required level, which will affect our ability to deliver the decent homes target in a sustainable manner. To address these risks we have already secured the design and professional consultancy services of a framework of six local firms offering construction consultancy services. We are committed to entering into a number of partnering contracts for the delivery of the Decent Homes programme of works, at present we are assessing the expressions of interest for these. We will have three contracts for the delivery of the Decent Homes works through to 2011, in place for 1st April 2007. Each of these contracts will see the ALMO entering into partnership in the delivery of Decent Homes to the Western and Eastern sides of the stock plus a further area which will include the Edmonton District and will develop capacity building within the community. These three major contracts will form the basis of the ALMO’s strategic partnering approach to major works, and through these contracts the ALMO will seek to ensure that supply of materials and potentially more importantly for the area (given the pressures which the Olympics will undoubtedly impose) labour are maintained and sustained. We will need our partners to invest in the local community by actively seeking to build skills capacity in the community and bridging current skills gaps. In addition to this strategic partnering approach we will also set up a framework of contractors to provide specialisms and project partnering on other major works projects which would not otherwise fall within the scope of the decent homes programme. The choice of frameworks here will provide the ALMO with the flexibility to take up procurement opportunities, which could not otherwise be included through the strategic partnering contracts. We are committed to the use of frameworks as a means of streamlining the procurement process and hence reducing the administrative costs of procuring works. b) Performance management The performance of all contractors will be monitored through the ALMO’s own local performance indicators which will be focused on quality delivery principals, resident satisfaction and resident empowerment. Responsive Repairs As a result of the fundamental service review of the repairs service we are in the process of setting up partnering contracts for responsive repairs and voids. We are packaging work to make contracts attractive to local contractors and have

21

based the mix of work on their feedback. These contracts will be in place from 1st

April 2007. We have started the tendering process and expect to select contractors in October/November 2006. We are using the National Housing Federation contract and schedule of rates, building in incentives and penalties. Our target is to make 2% savings for reinvestment in planned maintenance. Residents will be involved in the selection process and they have already received training. Supply Chain Partnering We have included within our partnering contracts provision for supply chain partnering so that windows, doors, kitchen units etc. can be bulk purchased. Contractors will be expected to manage this process. We have joined the London Housing Consortium for procurement. Improvement Programme We intend to use both partnering and traditional contracts to secure value for money and provide market-testing opportunities. We are aiming to have commitments to partnering arrangements for the delivery of works where continuity of labour and securing of supply chains are key, with contracts in place and arrangements being effective from 1

st April 2007. Within the tendering

process we will ensure the needs of the community are fully assessed and to aid with the tendering process we will use the independent advice of a critical friend to review what we are doing. An initial briefing with the critical friend and key officers is planned for March, with a stakeholder open day proposed thereafter to ensure the community needs and market practical initiatives are fully explored in the tendering process. For major works programmes to meet decent homes we plan to split the work between our partners by value, but with regard to locality within the existing management districts. Initially we plan to select nine contractors, frontloading the programme reducing to the best performing contractors over time. For individual projects where continuity of work either through constant labour teams or supply chains e.g. bespoke over cladding or external refurbishment schemes to tall blocks we are setting up frameworks so that we can enable mini tenders and drawing down measures to seek efficiencies through initial set up costs. We will also retain the ability to market test through traditional procurement to ensure a further opportunity to test value for money remains. We are aware that this procurement process is specialised and will take a significant amount of resource. Therefore we have taken the decision to set up a special project team to drive forward and champion the partnering procurement process and deliver the decent homes improvement programme in conjunction with the traditional procurement routes employed. To help ensure that the programme is delivering value for money we will be joining the Office of Government Commerce Strategic Development Club. This

22

has two advantages, firstly through knowledge sharing as we intend to work with other London Boroughs who were part of the pilot project, and secondly to benefit from the increased buying power that can be gained within the local area. The council is very keen to work with contractors and stakeholders to improve sustainability and strengthen the community. From the top down we want to ensure that the decent homes programme provides lifetime homes, addressing issues of affordability for the local community and from the bottom up, we will actively encourage and seek that contractors form links with local colleges drawing people into the building industry through either apprenticeship schemes or through support of learning and capacity build providers. At this stage we do not have firm plans, as we want to respond to what the community want. As previously mentioned we anticipate this process being developed from the proposed stakeholder open day. (f) Sustainability At the time of the last Census, Enfield had a population of 273,559 living in

110,398 households. Enfield is ranked 104th out of the 354 local authority areas

in England and Wales, according to the 2004 Index of Multiple Deprivation.

The Housing Needs Survey completed in 2005 indicates that the level of housing need in Enfield is acute with a significant gap between need and supply. However, this is often masked by the perception of Enfield as a ‘leafy’ borough. The average house price in Enfield is £233,226 with a flat/maisonette at £167,047 (Land Registry: Oct-Dec 2005). With average income in the Borough in the region of £28,000 it is difficult for families to access the owner/occupier market and the need for affordable housing which meets the needs of families. Housing Demand and Social Trends in Enfield The picture in Enfield is that there is a significant shortage of social housing stock and in particular shortages of larger family units. This situation is exacerbated by the limited opportunities to develop appropriate housing due to the high cost and lack of available land. Private developers are more competitive at securing any land that is available and have largely concentrated provision on smaller flat type dwellings. It is felt that the difficulties of securing appropriate accommodation are most acute for growing families and those with support needs. The general view among stakeholders is that there is an acute shortage of affordable housing in Enfield and that the ability to adequately address these needs is hindered by a lack of suitable land to develop on.

23

The Housing Needs Survey showed that Enfield has higher levels of owner occupation and lower levels of social rented housing when compared with both national and regional estimates. Enfield is more likely to contain single pensioner households and less likely to contain single non-pensioner households than London as a whole. In terms of dwelling type, Enfield has a higher incidence of flats/ maisonettes and a lower incidence of detached and semidetached dwellings than England as a whole, but the opposite is true when the dwelling stock is compared to London. Household Projections The key trend in predicting the need and demand for housing is the rate of

household formation. The results of the 2005 Housing Needs Survey indicate that

there will be an additional 552 households forming per year in Enfield, of which

82.3% will be unable to afford private sector housing. This makes for an

additional 455 households in housing need per year.

It is estimated that 1,246 existing households will fall into need per annum and a

further 1,534 in-migrant households per annum will move into the borough who

cannot afford suitable private sector housing. Furthermore, it is estimated that 76

households from the ex-institutional population will fall into need per annum.

In total, the figures indicate that additional need will arise from 3,311 households

per annum. The make-up of this figure is shown in the following table:

Supply of Affordable Housing Relets of existing social housing in the current stock are the most important source of supply. Based on the 2005 Housing Needs Survey it is estimated that the annual supply of affordable housing from the current stock in Enfield (council and RSL) is 685 units. The following table shows the make-up of this figure:

24

Further Details from the Housing Needs Survey 2005 During 2005 the Council commissioned Fordham Research Ltd to carry out a detailed housing needs survey in Enfield which provided a detailed picture of the current and future housing needs and preferences in the Borough. They key findings of the research were:

� 15.6% of all households in the borough are in unsuitable housing. � Overall there is an estimated shortfall of 2,916 affordable homes per year. � The main shortfall is for family sized accommodation of two or more

bedrooms. � 6.8% of all households are overcrowded and 26.7% under-occupy their

dwelling. � Average property prices in Enfield are 28% higher than the average for

England and Wales. � The average annual gross household income in Enfield is £27,913. � 17.9% of households in Enfield contain older persons (65+) only and a

further 7% contain a mix of both older and non-older people. � 10.4% of all households in Enfield contain someone with an accessibility

or support need. Ensuring Sustainability In order to ensure sustainability with the council’s housing stock, steps must be taken to ensure that not only are homes made decent, but also the general environment in which people live must encourage them to stay. As mentioned earlier in the bid, the council is keen to bid for the full 5% sustainability funding for works that will underpin decent homes investment. What has become clear from consultation with tenants and leaseholders, is that

25

whilst decent homes are important, other works which improve the environment; and reduce the fear of crime are equally important. Investment in environmental works are a key element of this, as are security enhancements, and raising the standards of communal areas. Our plans to introduce longer-term partnering contracts for responsive and planned maintenance will we believe release funds through efficiency savings that can be used to raise the standards of communal areas. Neighbourhood Renewal Funding and other specific funding schemes will continue to be utilised to ensure that security and environmental concerns are tackled on a local basis – by the development of further Neighbourhood Wardens and Estate Handyman schemes as appropriate, as well as target hardening measures. (g) Division of functions One of the key benefits of setting up the ALMO will be the separation of the Council’s housing management role from its strategic function. We see this as an opportunity to enhance both roles and therefore in drawing up the division of functions between the Council and the ALMO we have adhered to the ALMO Guidance. Furthermore, our proposal is to delegate various other functions that are not covered in the Guidance because we feel that they will give the ALMO the autonomy to focus on meeting the Decent Homes Standard and providing excellent housing services. The division of functions between the Council and the ALMO is as follows:

ALMO Functions

Council Functions

ALMO Business Plan HRA Business Plan (the ALMO will assist in drafting the Plan)

Stock Investment decisions and procurement

HRA management (this will be reviewed after the ALMO’s first year of operation)

Access to HRA reserves to meet the Decent Homes Standard

Programme of Best Value reviews, in consultation with the ALMO

Energy efficiency (ALMO stock) Housing strategy

Administration of RTB Rent and service charge setting/policy

Leasehold management Housing needs surveys and analysis

Responsive repairs RSL development / liaison / enabling

Planned and cyclical maintenance Supporting People strategy & managing the Supporting People Programme

Out of hours response service Homeless assessments and decisions

Tenancy management Hostels, refuges, temporary accommodation

26

Estate services Housing register, transfer list and mobility

Empty property management & under occupation

Lettings policy

Administration of lettings General housing advice

Mutual exchanges Owner occupation strategies

Tenant Involvement Private sector housing

Community halls management Housing benefits

Rent and service charge collection and arrears

Changes to secure tenancy conditions

Garages Setting ALMO performance standards (in conjunction with ALMO & residents)

Sheltered housing management Monitoring and audit of ALMO performance

Repairs to shops on estates North London sub-regional working

Letting of contracts for delegated functions (in accordance with contract procedure rules agreed with the Council)

Policy on tackling anti-social behaviour

Administration of the Grant to Vacate scheme (under the direction and agreement of the Council)

Management of shops on estates (except repairs)

RTB determinations and valuations

Progress reporting on energy efficiency measures under the Home Energy Conservation Act (HECA) 1995

Neighbourhood Renewal

The functions that we are proposing should be delegated to the ALMO will enable the ALMO to provide a ‘one stop’ housing management service to tenants and leaseholders and ensure that the ALMO is fully accountable for the provision of all landlord services. The division of functions will enable the ALMO to fully integrate all of the landlord’s maintenance and improvement programmes so that works can be carried out in the most cost effective manner. For example, it may be appropriate to combine planned maintenance works with capital works on a particular estate in order to achieve better value. The ALMO will be responsible for all estate management functions such as tenancy management, dealing with anti-social behaviour, rent collection, caretaking and grounds maintenance. This will enable the ALMO to take a holistic approach to improving services to tenants and leaseholders. For example, by ensuring that our Estate Managers work closely with caretakers, Neighbourhood Wardens and other ALMO staff. Leaseholders make up a significant proportion of our residents and therefore the inclusion of the leasehold management function within the ALMO’s responsibilities means that the ALMO can ensure there is complete parity in the standard of services received by tenants and leaseholders.

27

The ALMO will deal with empty properties and underoccupation which will enable the ALMO to develop strategies for making the best use of council housing to meet the high demand for accommodation within the borough. In addition to the traditional landlord services, the ALMO will also be responsible for dealing with the administration of the right to buy, community halls management, repairs to shops on estates and the administration of the Grant to Vacate scheme. Each of these functions is already successfully dealt with by the housing management team and it is felt that this arrangement should continue when the ALMO forms in order to provide continuity of service. Also, the functions in question do have close links with the landlord services that will be delivered by the ALMO. For example, processing a right to buy application involves obtaining information on the tenancy and the condition of the property; the community halls provide facilities for use by community groups, residents’ associations and residents on estates; shops on estates are generally part of residential blocks and therefore external repairs will affect both the shops and homes within the block; and finally the Grant to Vacate scheme will allow the ALMO to make the best use of the housing stock by freeing-up accommodation to meet the high demand within the borough. Our view is that these non-landlord services will enhance the ability of the ALMO to provide excellent services to residents and will not in any way detract from the provision of landlord services to residents. (h) Service delivery The priorities for the ALMO will be to achieve the Decent Homes Standard for every home it manages and to deliver high quality housing services to tenants. We believe we are well placed to deliver on both of these priorities. In 2001 we carried out a fundamental service review on the delivery of the Housing Capital and Planned Maintenance Programme. This led to some major changes in the way the programme is prioritised and delivered. In particular, there is now a much greater use of external design consultants and this has helped the Council to achieve a full spend in relation to its capital programme each year since the completion of the review. The review also led to other improvements such as greater resident involvement in formulating and monitoring the Programme.

Our last housing fundamental service review was carried out in 2003/4 on the repairs and maintenance service and this resulted in significant improvements to the service as demonstrated by the following performance indicators:

28

Performance Indicator Performance 2002/3

Performance 2003/4

Performance 2004/5

Target 2004/5

Percentage of local emergencies completed within timescale

84.77% 85.85% 96.19% 90%

Percentage of urgent repairs carried out within timescale (PI 72)

82.90% 83.77% 94.09% 90%

Average time taken to carry out non-urgent repairs (PI 73)

25.2 days 14.11 days 13.9 days 17 days

Percentage of appointments made and kept (PI 185)

0% 0% 94.69% 25%

Average time taken to relet empty properties (PI 68)

50.30 days 44.78 days 33 days 33 days

Proportion of rent lost through dwellings becoming vacant (PI 69)

2.47% 2.00% 1.6% 1.90%

An improvement plan was drawn up and is in the process of being implemented. Some of the main actions included in the improvement plan are:

� To set up a repairs and maintenance centre which brings together all staff engaged in responsive repairs, planned and cyclical maintenance and the capital programme. The repairs and maintenance centre will go ‘live’ in April 2006.

� To let new partnering contracts for all repairs and maintenance work. The

OJEU Notice will be placed in January 2006 and the contracts will begin on 1st April 2007.

� To enter into a partnering framework agreement for the delivery of major

works schemes. The framework agreement will commence on 1st April 2007.

� To introduce improved mechanisms for involving residents in the repairs

service, including involvement in contractor selection panels and in monitoring the performance of contractors.

The caretaking service underwent a fundamental service review in 2002 and as a result a detailed improvement plan was formulated. All of the tasks included in the improvement plan have been implemented, including:

� Creating mobile caretaking teams to supplement the resident caretakers. These mobile teams are able to clear flytipping on estates, the removal of heavy graffiti, carry out deep cleaning of internal floor coverings in blocks and carry out other caretaking duties.

29

� Recruiting Chargehands to provide a first line supervisor presence on estates.

� Increasing the frequency of cleaning on the majority of estates.

� Providing handyperson training to caretakers to enable them to carry out

minor repairs on estates.

� The purchase of new equipment such as improved cleaning machines. One of the other housing management priorities in terms of service delivery will be to maximise the rent collection rate. Our performance in relation to this best value indicator (BV 66a) has shown continuous improvement since 2000/01 when our collection rate was 93.29% compared to our 2004/5 performance which was 96.22%. Despite the improvements already made, we are keen to accelerate the pace of change and the rate of improvement and therefore the remaining areas of the housing management service are currently being reviewed by our partners, the Housing Quality Network. Their findings will be used by the Shadow ALMO Board to identify the detailed staffing structure of the ALMO and to contribute towards the delivery plan. Other stakeholders such as residents, the Federation of Enfield Community Associations and officers will also be involved in the process of developing the detailed staffing structures and formulating the delivery plan. We are members of the National Federation of ALMOs and are taking advantage of the opportunities for support and networking this offers. We have arranged visits to an existing 3-star ALMO for individual officers and for tenants and residents and will be carrying out further visits to other existing ALMOs. Performance management The CPA process has shown that Enfield is a fast improving authority. In 2004/5 it was confirmed that Enfield was one of the top 20 most improved councils in the country and in the 2005 Corporate Assessment process the Council was awarded an overall corporate assessment score of 3 (performing well). We have in place a comprehensive system of performance monitoring which incorporates comparisons with other local authorities through the Housemark benchmarking club In the recent repairs and maintenance inspection the Audit Commission saw performance management as a strength in the Housing Department. The report said:

30

“there are good performance management arrangements in place which in time will be embedded across the organisation. The performance management systems (PMS) are clearly linked to the overall corporate aims and objectives”

We recognise the importance of robust performance management systems and therefore have already made plans to introduce a Performance Management Team within the new repairs and maintenance centre. This team will be developed to adopt a wider performance management role within the ALMO. Improvement Plans We are developing a comprehensive housing management improvement plan which will be reported to Enfield’s Cabinet and the Housing Scrutiny Panel to ensure there is Member involvement in monitoring the plan. The actions contained in the plan will be derived from:

� The repairs and maintenance Audit Commission inspection. � The repairs and maintenance fundamental service review. � Tenant and leaseholder feedback from a number of sources including the

STATUS Survey, stock options appraisal process, HQN reality checks, complaints and roadshows to be held in February/March 2006.

� Outcomes from the HQN review of services The improvement plans are and will be designed to enable us to achieve a two and then a three star rating. Residents’ involvement in driving improvement We see the involvement of residents in the development of the service as being crucial to its success. We have therefore included in our proposed senior management structure for the ALMO the post of Community Engagement & Diversity Manager reporting directly to the Managing Director (see page XX). Our track record shows that we have sought to involve residents wherever possible in the development of the service. For example, residents were involved at all stages of the repairs and maintenance review and shaped its outcome. Members of the Federation of Enfield Community Associations (FECA) were part of the project team, various workshops were held with residents and valuable contributions were made by other residents’ fora such as the Sheltered Housing Forum and the Leaseholder Forum. SOLON Community Network recently carried out a review of Enfield’s Tenant Participation Service. They have made a number of recommendations to

31

improve the service and increase ways in which we can work with our tenants and leaseholders. We will include these recommendations in a new Tenant Involvement Strategy, which will give greater choices in the way tenants and leaseholders can be involved in developing the service. The strategy will be launched at a specially arranged Tenant and Leaseholder Conference in the Spring of 2006. Development of our Delivery Plan One of the key documents that will be produced in developing the ALMO will be the business and delivery plan. The Plan will be jointly endorsed by the Council and the ALMO and will reflect the partnership approach that will exist between the two organisations. Our business plan will contain the delivery plan which will set out the improvement works programme and the service standards. Initially our delivery plan will focus on achieving the decent homes standard and achieving at least a two star rating from the first Audit Commission inspection. It will set out the procurement methods for delivering the decent homes programme and our improvement plans. The format of our business and delivery plan will be closely linked to the ALMO Business Planning Guidance issued by the National Federation of ALMOs and Housemark in March 2004. The initial delivery plan will be produced for submission with our S.27 application which we are planning to submit in July 2006. The initial delivery plan will be developed by the Shadow ALMO Board and the Council in consultation with key stakeholders including tenants, leaseholders and the Federation of Enfield Community Associations. The delivery plan will pull together the following strategies and improvement plans that are being developed:

� The Tenant Involvement Strategy � The Housing Management Improvement Plan which will be further

developed from the current review of the service by the Housing Quality Network

� The repairs and maintenance improvement plan

In summary, we believe we can deliver the decent homes programme and high quality housing service because of our track record of continuous improvement, our performance management systems, our willingness to review services and to bring in external expertise to assist with the review process. The Audit Commission repairs and Maintenance Inspection Report states:

32

“The Council has a good track record in terms of carrying out a number of best value reviews and shows itself to be capable of bringing about significant change in a timely manner in most cases and example of these improvements are seen in the outcomes of the capital programme and caretaking FSR”.

(i) Best Value reviews Since 2000, Enfield has carried out a number of Best Value reviews of its services – Delivery of the Capital Programme, Caretaking Service, Accessing Affordable Housing and the latest review of the Repairs and Maintenance service. All of these have been inspected and the result for each was a one star rating with promising prospects for improvement. The last inspection was in April 2005 when the Housing inspectors reported that we had implemented all of their recommendations from their inspection of the Housing Management service, that our repairs and maintenance fundamental service review addressed the key weaknesses in the responsive repairs service and we have a good plan in place to deliver the necessary improvements. Following the inspection we have developed an action plan to implement the inspectors recommendations for further improvements to the service. All FSR reports, Action plans and inspections reports are attached at Appendix xxxx We asked SOLON to carry out a review of our resident involvement structures and have shared the results with residents, including FECA and other tenants representatives, members and staff. The SOLON report is attached at Appendix xxxx. We are currently working to implement the findings of the report. A key recommendation was to develop a resident involvement strategy that meets the needs of residents in Enfield and we are working with Housing Quality Network (HQN) to do this. Our plans are to set up the ALMO from 2

nd April 2007 and for our first inspection

to take place six months from that date. We have agreed with the Audit Commission that they will carry out an inspection in October/November 2007. As well as our action plans for improvements to the repairs service and resident involvement, we are working with HQN to develop a service improvement plan that will focus on resident priorities for improvements and help us achieve a 2 star rating by October 2007. HQN have carried out a desktop review and reality checks of the services to be covered by the ALMO and we have carried out self-analysis against the KLOEs. These have informed our thinking around the areas for improvement and we have developed these into a service improvement plan which focuses on what we need to do to deliver improved services. This is attached at Appendix xxxx

33

In addition, we are looking at the current staffing structures and remodelling them to focus on improving front line service services in line with tenant priorities and increasing value for money. We intend to invite an external body to carry out a mock inspection of the ALMO service in January 2007 to assess progress against our service improvement plans and give us an indication of any further improvements required. (j) Tenant involvement [This section will follow]. The bid needs to include: Details of tenant engagement during the Options Appraisal process and during preparation of the bid, and evidence of tenants’ support for the proposals. Details of any discussions with existing or proposed TMOs. The bid should also set out the arrangements for tenant involvement after the establishment of the ALMO. It should explain in particular how hard to reach groups are being and will continue to be involved and how their needs will be met. (k) ALMO structure and board We are proposing a single ALMO to cover the whole of the housing stock, with one ALMO Board of Directors taking responsibility for the ALMO. The Board will have overall responsibility for the ALMO’s performance and operation and will be accountable to the Council under the management agreement. In order to ensure that the governance structure is informed by and is responsive to tenants’ needs at a local level we intend to set up three Area Boards covering the same geographical areas as the three District Housing Offices and the three Community Housing Partnership Boards. The Area Boards will be set up after the ALMO has formed. The proposed governance structure is therefore as follows: As can be seen, there will be eighteen Directors on the ALMO Board as follows:

� Six Council nominees.

Main ALMO Board6 tenants/leaseholders

6 council nominees

6 independents

Western Area Board Eastern Area Board Edmonton Area Board

34

� Six tenants/leaseholders.

� Six independents. We have increased the number of Directors from the fifteen stated in the Trowers and Hamlin Model Constitution because this will allow two tenant representatives from each of the three District Office geographical areas to sit on the Board. This will help us to maximise the level of tenant involvement in the governance structures and ensure that each geographical area is represented on the Main ALMO Board. The three proposed Area Boards are a natural progression from our existing three Community Housing Partnership (CHP) Boards which are comprised of councillors and residents’ representatives. The CHP Boards have delegated budgets for environmental and security improvements on estates, they are consulted on the prioritisation of schemes for the capital programme and they enable residents and members to comment on the performance and standards of services within their respective geographical boundaries. The detailed terms of reference of the Area Boards will be decided by the Main ALMO Board once it is formed. However, they will have the following broad responsibilities:

• Local Service Planning – input into the development of local services consistent with the delivery plan

• Local Investment Planning – agreeing the capital investment plan for the area to meet the Decent Homes Standard by 2010. The investment will be programme and project managed by the ALMO and delivered by its partner contractors.

• Local Tenant Participation – within the overall framework for tenant participation to recommend local tenant participation initiatives and agree local tenant participation compacts

• Local Performance Monitoring – within the performance management structure for the ALMO monitor performance indicators for services in the area.

All delegations will flow from the strategies, objectives, plans, standards, policies frameworks and targets set by the ALMO Board and Area Boards will discharge all responsibilities delegated to them within the strategic framework established by the ALMO Board. The Shadow ALMO Board will identify the mechanism for electing tenants to the Main ALMO Board. Independent Board Members will be recruited with the overall aim of enhancing the range of skills amongst board members. We are aiming to form the Shadow ALMO Board by 31

st March 2006. [This will be

firmed up by time the bid is submitted. We will also supply the names and brief details about the Council & tenant representatives in the bid].

35

The main ALMO Board and the Area Boards will interface with the resident participation structures that are currently being developed by the Council in partnership with tenants, leaseholders and the Housing Quality Network. Residents representatives in conjunction with their Independent Tenant Advisers (Solon Community Network) have identified a range of training and development needs for the tenant Shadow Board members and for tenants who may be potential Board members in the future. Further work will be carried out with Solon and with tenants to ensure that the training is sensibly phased over a period of time. (See Appendix XX for details of identified training) The Council will work closely with Solon Community Network and with residents’ representatives to identify the individual training needs of Shadow Board members and potential Board members. The above training and development framework will then be used as the basis for addressing these training needs. (l) ALMO independence Enfield will ensure there is a clear separation of responsibilities between the ALMO and the strategic housing service. We feel that this separation is essential in order to allow the ALMO to focus on providing excellent housing services to tenants and leaseholders and to meet the Decent Homes Standard for every home under its management. Equally, the separation will allow the council to develop its strategic housing role and to focus on major issues such as homelessness and the enabling role. The Council is committed to the principle that the ALMO should function independently in order to contribute most effectively to the Council’s overall aims and objectives. The steps that will be taken in order to establish and maintain the ALMO’s independence are:

� Enfield will use the model management agreement developed by Trowers and Hamlin as the basis for the agreement between the council and the ALMO. The final agreement will be negotiated between the shadow Board and the council and will offer a clear framework for separation of responsibilities.

� Our monitoring framework is based on the principle that the ALMO will

maintain its own effective internal monitoring for all areas of activity and will report its performance to the council at agreed times. While the council will focus on ensuring that the ALMO’s systems are adequate through regular audit and verification of performance data.

36

� The ALMO will be given significant freedom to choose its own support service providers. The post of Head of Business Strategy & Resources within the ALMO will ensure there is a business-like approach adopted in procuring support services, for example by ensuring that best value considerations are at the forefront of the decision-making process. As with other partnerships that the council is involved in, there will be clear procedures agreed to ensure there is ongoing discussion regarding the choice of support service suppliers.

� Where support services are procured from the Council by the ALMO there

will be service level agreements with clearly identified standards. The delivery of the services will be monitored to ensure adherence to the standards.

� Residents, members and officers have already developed a distinct logo

and branding for the ALMO in order to emphasise the independence from the Council.

� The ALMO will have its own premises for delivering its functions.

� The ALMO will develop its own human resources procedures (subject to

TUPE requirements) in order to help develop a culture that is distinct from that of the Council.

� A comprehensive capacity building programme will be set up for residents

who will sit on the Shadow Board of Directors to ensure they are able to participate fully in the running of the ALMO. The capacity building programme will be ongoing after the ALMO has formed.

We are confident that the ALMO will operate independently of the Council because of the Council’s excellent track record of contracting and commissioning services through external organisations and partners. These include:

o All responsive, planned and capital programme works to Enfield’s housing stock is carried out by external contractors.

o At present external design consultants are frequently used in

designing major works schemes and in the future will be exclusively used.

o The Council will shortly be entering into a PFI arrangement for the

maintenance of street lighting.

o Entering into a PFI arrangement to build and maintain the Highlands School (this was the first PFI Secondary School to be opened).

37

o The Enfield’s leisure facilities are managed on behalf of the Council by the Enfield Leisure Centres Ltd (ELCL), which is a “not for profit” company. The Board of ELCL is made up of officers, customer representatives and Council members.

(m) ALMO staffing arrangements The ALMO’s senior management staffing structure has been developed so that it reflects the priorities of the ALMO. These will be to achieve the Decent Homes Standard for every home the ALMO manages (this will be the primary responsibility of the Head of Technical Services) and to deliver high quality housing services to tenants (this will be the primary responsibility of the Head of Housing Services). The post of Head of Business Strategy & Resources is essential in order to ensure compliance with legal and financial requirements placed upon companies and to ensure that the ALMO receives good Information Technology (IT), Human Resources (HR) and other support to meet its objectives. Our structure shows that the Community Engagement & Diversity Manager will report directly to the Managing Director to reflect the importance of community engagement in meeting the ALMO’s objectives. The postholder will help to improve the links between the ALMO and the wider community, with particular emphasis on ‘hard to reach’ groups. This will involve working with a range of stakeholders including tenants, leaseholders, community organisations, voluntary groups, elected members and various agencies and services. One of the primary aims will be to increase opportunities for local people to participate in influencing the decisions of the ALMO. The post will also provide a clear link between the ALMO and its partners, for example registered social landlords.

Managing Director

Head of Housing Services

� Tenancy Management &

enf orcement

� Caretaking serv ices� Grounds Maintenance

� Income recovery

� Leasehold Management

� Serv ice dev elopment

Head of Technical Services

� Asset strategy

� Decent Homes

� Capital programme� Planned Maint.

� Responsiv e repairs

� Painting Programme

� Procurement

Head of Business Strategy &Resources

� ALMO Finance

� Accounting

� IT, HR & other supportserv ices

� Company Secretary

� Gov ernance

� Audit & compliance

support

� Business Planning� Perf ormance Management

� Communications

Community Engagement& Div ersity Manager

38

Our detailed staffing structures below the senior management tiers will be developed in consultation with various stakeholders taking into account the aims and objectives of the ALMO. As a result of a fundamental service review carried on our repairs and maintenance service we are currently setting up a repairs and maintenance centre which will be responsible for responsive repairs, planned and cyclical maintenance, the capital programme and delivering the Decent Homes Standard. The repairs and maintenance centre will be headed by the Head of Technical Services and will open in April 2006. We have worked closely with the trade unions and the affected staff to ensure that the required staffing changes have been implemented smoothly. [Further details of staffing structures will be added once HQN have completed the review of housing management and stakeholders have been consulted]. We are currently reviewing the remaining housing management teams with our partners, the Housing Quality Network, in order to identify the areas that require strengthening or change in order to achieve a two and then a three-star Audit Commission rating. Our intention is to implement a structure that will deliver excellent housing services and will be able to transfer to the ALMO. Regular meetings are taking place with the trade unions and with the affected staff to discuss the changes. The new staffing structures will need to be considered by the Shadow Board when appointed. The Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 1981 will apply to staff transferring to the ALMO. Also, the ALMO will participate in the Local Government Pension Scheme and all of its employees will be eligible for membership of the scheme. The ALMO will be an equal opportunities employer. Transferring and future employees will be afforded equal and fair treatment in relation to recruitment, selection, terms and conditions of employment, training and promotion. The ALMO will work to actively combat discrimination and ensure that prospective or present employees are not treated less favourably on any grounds. The Council closely monitors the composition of its workforce in terms of gender, disabilities and ethnic monitoring. The ALMO will continue this monitoring and will work towards ensuring that the ALMO staff reflects the make-up of the local community.

39

(n) Strategic context Housing Strategy - Strategic context The Housing Strategy is the Council's key housing document. It provides an overview of housing and housing related issues across all tenures. The main elements of the strategy are the:

• strategic context of housing in the Council's corporate vision for Enfield

• assessment of stock condition across all tenures

• housing need in Enfield

• housing supply and demand in Enfield

• housing priorities including accessible housing and housing support

• identifying gaps in provision

• "quality of life" issues such as crime, anti-social behaviour, the environment and regeneration

• involvement of residents, partner agencies and stakeholders agreeing housing strategic objectives and priorities for action

• partnership working with agencies such as Registered Social Landlords (RSLs) and the private sector in meeting housing needs

• an action plan to address key housing priorities To address key housing issues the Council, in partnership with stakeholders agencies, has set out Enfield’s housing priorities for the next five years and has produced an agreed plan of action to enable these priorities to be addressed in a systematic way. Key housing issues include:

• maintaining the supply of affordable housing and maximising the use of existing stock

• the condition of the housing stock in Enfield

• housing issues in the supporting people strategy and the homelessness strategy

• needs of Enfield’s BME residents

• services for leaseholders

• a safe, clean and well run environment for residents

• value for money in the provision of services

40

• consultation, participation and communication with residents and service users

The ALMO will assist with the achievement of the above. The improvements planned as a result of the additional investment will ensure that estates will be improved to enhance the environment and help to reduce anti-social behaviour and homes our homes all meet the Decent Homes Standard by 2010. Retaining our stock provides more choice of landlord for existing and new tenants in Enfield. The ALMO management structure supports tenants / leaseholder participation. Tenants will be represented on the main ALMO Board and on the Local Boards. This will be in addition to the tenant participation structure included in Section XX. The Corporate Context The corporate vision of Enfield is that of one of the best places in which to live, work, study and do business; a place that enhances the prospects of all its people and values their diversity; a place that is clean and safe, and manages its resources for future generations; a place where people learn for life; a place where residents are involved in their communities; a place that is prosperous and healthy, enjoying good access to the best economic, educational and cultural opportunities; a place with high quality public services for everyone. To achieve its vision the Council takes an integrated approach to its role as a strategic authority. Officers from relevant council departments are represented on the various strategy groups and are responsible for ensuring that:

• there is a two way flow of information with corporate strategies being informed by service specific issues and vice versa; and

• the work required from each council service area is progressed to ensure that individual strategy objectives are achieved

The Council’s Strategic Housing Objectives are:

• to maintain and improve the physical condition of the housing stock with regards to the Decent Homes standard

• to maintain and improve the supply of affordable housing, promote best use of stock and ensure the effective allocation of social housing on a basis that is fair and equal

• to promote a range of housing opportunities for people who need housing related support and to address the needs of homeless households

41

• to ensure that government targets for new housing provision are met in a manner consistent with planning policies and the needs of residents

• to promote community safety

• to promote the protection of the environment

• to support the economic regeneration of the most deprived parts of Enfield

• to support the aspirations of residents to become homeowners

• to facilitate the development of a safe and decent private rented housing market

• to pursue best practice and value for money in the provision of housing and housing services

• to ensure residents have a real opportunity to influence the delivery of services and to participate in the Council’s decision making

The Council’s Corporate objectives will be supported by the ALMO. The key strategic objective to improve the physical condition of the housing stock, with regard to the Decent Homes Standard, will be achieved through the new additional investment as a result of the ALMO programme. Money from the ALMO programme will be used for the environmental improvement of our estates which helps in the regeneration of an area and a reduction in anti-social behaviour. Our tenant participation and area board structure ensures that residents have a real opportunity to influence the services provided by the ALMO. Our performance management framework will ensure that our services are tenant and leaseholder led, make the best use of resources and provide value for money for tenants and leaseholders. Local Strategic Partnership, Neighbourhood Renewal and Regeneration The Enfield Strategic Partnership (ESP) was formally established in November 2001 to bring together all major public sector organisations, local businesses, community and voluntary groups to make Enfield one of the best places in which to live, work, study and do business. While the ESP is a borough-wide body, it also oversees the expenditure of Neighbourhood Renewal funding in the deprived wards of Edmonton through the Neighbourhood and Stronger Communities Panel, a sub group of the Board, which is chaired by Gary Walker, a business representative. Enfield has been allocated approximately £3.7m for the two years ending 31

st

March 2006. The aim is to make a real and noticeable difference in the NRF wards that are in Edmonton and Ponders End. Funds are targeted by the ESP to make an impact on national floor targets: education, employment, crime, housing and health. The ESP monitors the

42

progress of projects commissioned. At the end of the programme projects will be mainstreamed. Enfield is a pilot for the first Local Area Agreements, the high level aims of which focus on reducing child poverty. The ESP will manage the LAA which will also contribute to improving life expectancy and increasing employment opportunities in the most deprived parts of the borough. Our Neighbourhood Renewal Fund (NRF) allocation for 2006-2008 is committed to reducing child poverty in the NRF area. The regeneration strategy, "Sustaining Communities for Enfield", provides a fully integrated approach to the delivery of a range of programmes that will improve the quality of life of every resident and consolidate the economic base to improve prosperity. A key aspiration is to provide a decent home for all by 2010 and provide new housing consistent with planning policies and the needs of residents. Some key priorities include:

• providing decent homes for all by 2010

• improving the liveability of neighbourhoods

• the Edmonton Partnership Initiative, a major regeneration scheme in the most deprived part of the borough, is a partnership with St Modwen Properties PLC and Green Horizons Housing Association involving the construction of 737 new homes, the redevelopment of the shopping centre and the construction of a new leisure centre

• the Edmonton Partnership Initiative is a scheme of up to £120m for regeneration of the town centre and surrounding area

• housing is at the heart of the partnership with 479 new housing association homes built and a further 560 refurbished

• by 2007 a further 258 homes in the pipeline will be completed The ALMO will support the objectives of the ESP by improving our own estates and homes to the Decent Homes Standard. This regeneration work will take place alongside other redevelopment in the area leading to the development of sustainable communities within the Borough. The Capital Strategy and the Business Plan Enfield Council’s Capital Strategy is built around the Council’s strategic corporate objectives and priorities. These are detailed in ‘Putting Enfield First’, the Corporate Strategy and the Enfield Council Improvement Plan 2003-2006. Housing is one of the most important assets of the Council and the Capital Strategy provides an effective system of checks and balances to ensure effective management of assets, prudent financial management and probity.

43

The key points emerging from the Business Plan:

• the stock is in generally good condition

• work is in progress to meet both the final and interim target for decent homes

• the CDI initiative makes better use of HRA assets by securing the development of new housing that is in turn targeted to under occupying tenants and those who need wheelchair accessible housing – good progress is being made to maximise the use of current stock

• significant work is in progress to improve the Council’s response in relation to anti-social behaviour, graffiti and residents concerns around safety and security

• residents are closely involved in decisions on priorities for the capital programme through the Community Housing Partnerships

• robust mechanisms for participation are in place to support residents in expressing their views on Council policy

• effective partnerships, developed through a competitive efficiency framework, are in place with outside agencies for architectural and building design services

• the current Business Plan projects that the plan will remain in credit for its lifetime

The ALMO will be responsible for the delivery of the HRA Business Plan objectives. Specifically, achieving the Decent Homes Standard by 2010. The ALMO local board and tenant participation structures will ensure that tenants and leaseholders have an input into how improvement programmes are delivered. Through this structure tenants and leaseholders will also have an input into service planning and performance monitoring. To ensure that HRA resources are being effectively used the ALMO will have to demonstrate value for money. Strategic Objectives for Partner Agencies In its enabling role the Council supports partnership working and welcomes and values the contribution of its partners to meeting the strategic housing objectives. In the social housing sector Enfield Council has provided support to a number of RSL bids over the years with the focus firmly on meeting the Council’s strategic housing objectives. In the last five years the Council has spent £10.2m of its own resources producing 249 affordable homes. The Council has also supported substantial investment by the Housing Corporation. With the Council’s support affordable accommodation to rent or purchase has been available to those either in need or aspiring to home ownership. In the last five years the Council has enabled RSLs to provide:

44

• 1,637 homes for rent and shared ownership

• 49 homes for special needs groups The ALMO would want to consider the development of new housing in Enfield to help to meet the Council’s strategic housing objectives. In the short term the ALMO would work with RSLs in the area to develop joint services for tenants. (o) Local authority’s strategic [This section is being considered by CHASS DMT and will follow]. The bid will need to include: How the local authority proposes to discharge its strategic housing function. This should specify the financial and staffing resources to be devoted to this important area and explain where these would fit in the authority’s corporate structure. Evidence of the corporate impact on the local authority of the ALMO should also be provided. (p) Monitoring The Council is adopting new Partnership procedure rules, within its Constitution, to govern relationships with partners. The detailed monitoring arrangements for the ALMO will be agreed in the context of the new procedure rules. The Council’s intention is to apply equal rigour to financial information relating to the ALMO as to our internal financial arrangements.

The management agreement will set a wide range of targets and performance standards for all aspects of the ALMO’s responsibilities. Those that relate to the achievement of the Decent Homes Standard will be incorporated into the ALMO’s 5-year delivery plan with targets specified for each year. In order to ensure that the ALMO is meeting the requirements of the management agreement and its delivery plan the following framework for monitoring the operational and financial performance of the ALMO will be put in place:

45

ALMO Monitoring Framework

Description of Monitoring By Whom? Frequency

Operational performance

Performance against Delivery Plan (Meeting the Decent Homes Standard)

- detailed monitoring

- Summary monitoring *

Meetings with Strategic Housing Service

Community Housing and Adult Social Services (CHASS) Departmental Management Team (DMT) (combined with financial monitoring report – see below)

Cabinet & the Housing Scrutiny Panel

Monthly

Monthly

6 monthly

Performance to achieve a 2 star rating (and then 3 stars)

- detailed monitoring

- Summary monitoring *

Meetings with Strategic Housing Service CHASS DMT (combined with financial monitoring report – see below) Corporate Management Board (CMB) Cabinet & the Housing Scrutiny Panel

Monthly Monthly

Quarterly 6 monthly

46

Description of Monitoring By Whom? Frequency

Financial monitoring Income & Expenditure - detailed monitoring of exp/inc to date and projections for the year (cap & rev) - Summary monitoring statements * Cashflow statements and projections Key Balance Sheet items

Content and format to be specified by Director of Finance & Corporate Resources (D F&CR). Monthly meetings between the ALMO’s Head of Resources and the Council’s senior finance staff. CHASS DMT (combined with performance monitoring reports – see above) To be discussed at monthly meetings between the ALMO’s Head of Resources and the Council’s senior finance staff. To be defined by D F&CR To be discussed at meetings between the ALMO’s Head of Resources and the Council’s senior finance staff.

Monthly Monthly Monthly Quarterly

Annual Accounts

Annual financial returns required Audited Company Accounts Information required for audit purposes

To be provided by ALMO within specified deadlines; content and format to be specified by D F&CR To be provided to D F&CR within specified deadlines for Group and Whole of Government Accounts Content / format as specified by D F&CR to accord with external audit requirements

Annually Annually As required

47

Other financial information To support subsidy and other returns Detailed budget for the year ahead and MTFP

To be provided by ALMO within specified deadlines; content and format to be specified by D F&CR To be discussed with Council’s Head of Finance

As required Annually

Auditing of performance data and financial records.

Strategic Housing Service and Internal Audit Team.

Annually

Review of performance and discussion on priorities / performance targets.

Senior managers from the Council and the ALMO.

Annually

Review and consult on objectives and performance targets.

Conference involving Members, residents, council and ALMO officers and other stakeholders.

Annually

The monitoring framework is based on the principle that the ALMO will maintain its own effective internal monitoring for all areas of activity and will report its performance to the council at agreed times. The reports will link financial performance with operational performance and will include best value and local performance indicators, financial information and progress against strategic objectives and major projects. The council will focus on ensuring that the ALMO’s systems are adequate through regular audit and verification of performance data. We believe that this approach allows the Council to ensure that the ALMO will achieve the agreed objectives and targets without interfering in the operational matters of the ALMO. Tenants and leaseholders will form a key part of the performance monitoring process. Tenant monitoring will be incorporated into the process including the development and monitoring of strategic documents as well as operational targets. The framework is set out blow:

48

Type of Monitoring Method of Monitoring Frequency

Strategic

HRA Business Plan Delivery Plan ALMO Business Plan

Setting objectives and monitoring action plan Development of plan / monitoring Progress Setting Objectives and monitoring action Plan

Annually / 6 monthly 6 monthly Annually / 6 monthly

Operational

Budget and Budget Monitoring Improvement Programmes Service Improvement Plans Best Value and Local (Enfield) performance indicators

Input into spending priorities and monitoring spending against budget Determining priorities and monitoring progress Determining Priorities and monitoring progress Setting targets and monitoring progress

Annually / quarterly Annually / quarterly As required / quarterly Annually / quarterly

Local

Best value and Local (Enfield) performance indicators for specific area Local (area) performance indicators Area investment programme priorities

Input into target setting for area and monitoring progress Development of area performance indicators Input into the investment programme for the area

Annually / quarterly Annually / quarterly Annually / quarterly

49

(q) Timetable The following table sets out the key stages in the establishment of Enfield Homes ALMO:

Date Action

November 05

First meeting of the ALMO Steering Group

December 05

Submit Expression of Interest

January 06

ALMO Steering Group to approve final draft of ALMO bid

January 06

Approve and implement new Tenant Involvement Strategy

February 06

Cabinet to approve the final ALMO bid

February 06 Submit Round 6 ALMO bid to the ODPM

February 06

ALMO Steering Group to agree methods for appointing Shadow Board

April 06

Establish Shadow ALMO Board

April 06

Carry out skills audit of Shadow Board members

April 06

Begin induction / training programme for Shadow Board members

May 06

Agree detailed staffing structures

May 06

Prepare draft Management Agreement

June 06

Prepare draft Delivery Plan

June 06

Prepare draft Constitution

June 06

Conditional offer from ODPM

July 06

Begin TUPE consultation

July 06

Finalise arrangements / SLAs for support services

July 06

Approve Management Agreement / Delivery Plan / Constitution

July 06

Submit application for Section 27 consent

September 06

Receive Section 27 consent

October 06 Finalise TUPE transfer details & pension details

50

December 06

Prepare & agree financial budgets for the ALMO

January 07

Appoint senior staff team as necessary

March 07

Company registration of Enfield Homes

April 07

ALMO goes live / official transfer of staff to the ALMO

April 07

Pre-inspection

October 07

First ALMO inspection by Audit Commission

December 07

Additional ALMO funding approved

(r) Building Cost Model [This information is still subject to discussions between HQN and Finance staff] The bid will need to include: a completed BCM. The information within the BCM should both support and be supported by information given elsewhere in the application. It would be helpful if key information contained within the BCM (e.g. proposed ALMO funding profile, progression toward Decent Homes) were also included within the formal bid document.

51

List of appendices Cabinet reports of 13th June and 14th October 2005 Options appraisal sign off letter FECA letter of support SOLON report on post decision door knocking exercise Resident training plan Business Plan 2003-04 Housing Strategy 2005-10 Building Costs Model Service improvement plan Details of the sustainability element of the bid

Appendix 1

52

GOVERNMENT OFFICE

FOR LONDON Donald Graham Director of Community, Housing and Social Services London Borough of Enfield Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield

EN1 3XN

Don Thomas 8th Floor

Government Office for London Riverwalk House 157-161 Millbank

London SW1P 4RR

Tel: 020 7217 Fax: 020 7217 [email protected] 22nd December 2005

Dear Donald Sign off of Decent Homes Options Appraisal for London Borough of Enfield The Sustainable Communities Plan launched in February 2003 introduced a requirement for all stock-holding local authorities to submit option appraisals (OA) to Government Regional Offices (GOs) for sign off. Guidance for local authorities ‘Delivering Decent Homes – Option Appraisal’ was issued by ODPM in June 2003 and set out the criteria against which option appraisals would be assessed. We and the Community Housing Task Force (CHTF) have been working with you on this process and you submitted your OA supporting documents for assessment in July 2005.

I am pleased to tell you that, together with the CHTF, it is our view that the OA meets the criteria laid out in Annex D of “Delivering Homes – Options Appraisal” and has been completed in accordance with that that guidance. This means that you may proceed with implementing the option chosen to meet the Decent Homes target without having to receive further authorization from this Government Office unless directed so by ODPM.

Whilst our Financial Consultant has confirmed that the assumptions made in the OA are reasonable, I would like to take this opportunity to highlight to you that delivery of the chosen option is dependent upon a number of factors that have yet to be confirmed, not least the ALMO and the level of “Supported Capital Expenditure”.

Appendix 1

53

We will be working closely with you to review progress on regular basis and, with the CHTF, also want to continue to together provide any advice and assistance required to enable and assist delivery of your selected option. Should your choice of option become unachievable or run into difficulties we should meet at the earliest opportunity with a view to re-opening discussions regarding Enfields plans to meet the 2010 Decent Homes target. Should you wish to discuss further please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours sincerely,

Don Thomas

Appendix x

54

Potential Audience

Course Title

What it will cover

General

What is governance?

•••• Being a board member

•••• Code of conduct

•••• Declarations of interest

•••• Conflicts of interest

•••• What are issues the board should deal with

•••• Directors’ liabilities

General

Chairing and participation in meetings

•••• Effective Meetings and Decision Making

•••• Roles in meetings

•••• Getting heard

General

Interviewing skills

•••• Why interview

•••• Structure of an interview

•••• Types of questions

•••• Your interview styles

General

What is an ALMO?

•••• What an ALMO does

•••• Setting up an ALMO

•••• Performance issues

•••• Refresher or catch up session for newer members

General

Inspections

•••• The audit process

•••• What evidence you will need

•••• Examples of good practice

•••• Key lines of enquiry

General

Negotiation skills

•••• Types of negotiation

•••• Negotiation and the law

•••• Tools for negotiation

General

Decision Making

•••• Vision and Values Session

•••• Where you can have a say

•••• Who makes the decisions

General

Understanding the money: Finance and the ALMO

•••• HRA

•••• Capital and revenue

•••• Rents

•••• Major repairs allowance

•••• Subsidy

General

Equal opportunities And diversity

•••• Where are we now?

•••• The law and equality

•••• Good practice

General

Tenant participation Structures

•••• Best practice in recruitment of board members

•••• Consultation and involvement

Appendix x

55

•••• Regulations

•••• Landlord and tenant relations

•••• Hard to reach groups

Board

Team Building

•••• Strategic planning

•••• Looking at the roles on the board

Board

ALMO Delivery Plan/Business Planning

•••• Service improvements

•••• Key milestones

•••• Monitoring

Board

Housing Law

•••• Board as landlord

•••• Relationships with the council

•••• Monitoring performance

Board

Management Agreement

•••• Responsibilities

•••• Finance

•••• Staff

Board

Human Resources

•••• Staff

•••• Role of the board in staff management

•••• Staff policies and procedures

Board

Service Delivery - Housing Management and Best Value

•••• Key lines of enquiry

•••• Audits

•••• Best value indicators

Board

Contract Management

•••• Risk Management

•••• Procurement – Choosing contractors

•••• Monitoring contractors

Board

Presentation skills and dealing with the Media

•••• Understanding your audience

•••• Getting your message across

•••• Do and don’t

Appendix x

56

Ward Code* Ward Name Number of dwellings

Number as a percentage

2004 Index of Multiple

Deprivation

AN Angel Road 413 5.70%

AR Arnos 371 5.12%

BO Bowes 83 1.15%

BR Broxbourne 284 3.92%

BU Bullsmoor 334 4.61%

CH Chase 274 3.78%

CR Craig Park 610 8.42%

EL Enfield Lock 291 4.02%

EW Enfield Wash 576 7.95%

GA Grange 37 0.51%

GO 19 0.26%

GS Green Street 290 4.00%

HI Highfield 166 2.29%

HM Hertsmere 145 2.00%

HO Hoe Lane 482 6.65%

HU Huxley 57 0.79%

JU Jubliee 118 1.63%

LA Latymer 432 5.96%

ME Merryhills 60 0.83%

OA Oakwood 463 6.39%

PE Ponders End 154 2.13%

PG Palmers Green 49 0.68%

RA Raglan 29 0.40%

SA St. Alphege 249 3.44%

SG Southgate Green 39 0.54%

SM St. Marks 92 1.27%

SO Southbury 39 0.54%

SP St. Peters 181 2.50%

TO Town 195 2.69%

VI Village 76 1.05%

WE Weir Hall 105 1.45%

WH Winchmore Hill 23 0.32%

Appendix x

57

WI Willow 82 1.13%

WO Worcesters 314 4.34%

ZG Enfield Highway 34 0.47%

ZM Jubilee 4 0.06%

ZS 73 1.01%

* The former ward boundaries have been used so that the comparison can be made between non-decent housing numbers and the Index of Multiple Deprivation scores.


Recommended