Agenda item

Councillor Whitehead led the discussion with the following opening remarks:

• This was one of the council’s important tasks currently and it was being ably managed by the Housing Department, working together with East Kent Housing (EKH);
• The key report updates included:

·  How the council was ensuring that there was adequate staffing for the housing service, once it is in-house from 01 October 2020;

·  The induction of staff during the transition period;

·  Informing and involving tenants during this process;

·  On going work by ICT to separate the housing management systems amongst the four councils and supporting the staff to train for the new systems;

·  The work being done by the Communications team to keep staff and customers informed about the changes;

·  The winding up of EKH.

• How the council manages the transition and keeping all stakeholders informed was important for the success of the project;
• The basis for continued success of an in-house system would be providing a secure base, competent and coherent systems to manage ongoing responsibilities;
• The ongoing work by Housing has been exemplary;
• The council was laying a new foundation for a continued relationship with tenants and leaseholders;
• As the landlord, the council was also laying the groundwork for competent monitoring of housing services going forward.

Members asked questions and made comments as follows:

• This was a very positive report;
• What if things do not go according to plan?
• Did EKH have any worries that the 1^st October deadline would not be met for the move over of services from EKH to TDC?
• Was TDC going to get the number of staff that it expected?
• Were the transition costs still expected to stay within the agreed £250,000 budget?
• What method had been used to engage tenants and leaseholders? What had been the feedback? Have they expressed any particular worries?
• Was there a process for monitoring the transition of the service on the ongoing service provided by in-housing service?
• What was the difference between the services TDC was offering to the one offered by EKH?
• One of the main objectives of the setting up EKH was making savings? Would this still be the case once the service was brought in-house?

In response Councillor Whitehead and Ms Sally O’Sullivan, Tenant and Leaseholder Services Manager said the following:

• The portfolio holder had some concerns about how the service would wind down, how tenants and leaseholders feel listened to and have works attended to during the transition period. Council officers are meeting with resident representatives every three weeks to discuss progress on the transition;
• The council was doing everything possible to make the transition as smooth as is possible;
• The Council is trying to mitigate risk during this transition period. This included tackling the issue of inadequate office accommodation for staff at TDC main offices. The Covid-19 regulations that require social distancing and other risk management measures in office settings have made this more complex;
• There were limited number of staff allowed in the offices at any one time and this had impacted on the induction programme, as staff were having to split into smaller groups;
• With regards to ICT: There had been delays in completing the set up, due to the complexity of the systems in question (Novation documents and maintaining change control);
• If ICT falls behind, it did not pose a significant risk to the transition as staff would be able to continue to give front line services to tenants; it does delay the future plans to improve the system;
• There were no worries that the 1^st October deadline would not be met. There are EKH staff transferring to the Council who will bring with them the procedural and operational knowledge required to cover the vital areas in housing management;
• Individual meetings were being held to cover operational and caseload handovers. These meetings with individual staff had been quite positive;
• In the new structure the Council will get just over 50% of the staff it required. A large recruitment campaign over the last 4 months has filled a majority of the remaining posts that would enable the council to deliver the service as expected;
• Service Managers have started work already, which helps to give them a good head start of organising their teams and check out the systems they would using;
• Yes, the transition costs would be within the agreed budget;
• The council had been holding much more regular meetings with tenants and leaseholders to discuss what they wanted from an ongoing service;
• Tenants expressed their desire to feel that they were being heard by their representatives and that they were being represented fully and that they could be able to track any progress regarding their queries (repairs). They were aware that there would no be vast improvements on day one of the transition, but were optimistic;
• The difference needs to be that the services needed to be coherent and having individuals responsible for particular geographical areas;
• Effective communication and effective system for tenant participation was needed;
• A comprehensive review was going to be conducted of the entire service to take stock of what was currently being offered. This would lead to the drafting of an action plan. Tenants and leaseholders would be involved in this process;
• The action plan would be jointly monitored by both TDC and tenants and leaseholders to ensure that the improvements were actually taking place
• Quarter 2 performance indicators from EKH would be used by TDC as the baseline for monitoring moving forward.

Mr Tim Willis, Deputy Chief Executive and S151 Officer advised the meeting as follows:

• The part of the success of the transition so far was down to the Transition Project Manager, Ms O’Sullivan. Ms O’Sullivan had since been appointed to the role of Tenants and Leaseholder Services Manager at TDC. This would help with the transition and continuity of running the service thereafter;
• One of the reasons why EKH not being as successful as it could have been was running it as a shared service was the TDC priorities and objectives did not always translate to those of EKH on the ground. Bringing the service back in-house, would overcome some of those obstacles;
• The council was mindful of the risk of the service deteriorating during the transition. The issue was on the risk register and the council was working on addressing the risk throughout the process;
• There was a significant amount of funding into housing stock in the capital programme, over the next 2-3 years;
• The council would work towards providing a better service within limited, even diminishing resources.

Thereafter Members noted the report.