By Alistair McIntosh, HQN CEO

Poole is famous as the home of Sunseekers – the finest speedboats in the world. Now it has an even better claim to fame. In the latest batch of RSH inspection results Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council (BCP) hits the top spot with C1. So, too, does Cheshire Peaks and Plains (CPP) from Macclesfield – home to the giant killers that put Crystal Palace out the Cup. Well done to both.

Everyone should read the BCP report: it sets out very clearly what the RSH is looking for at a C1. By way of contrast, the CPP report is light on detail. That’s a missed opportunity for the RSH. You have to wonder why inspectors take such a different approach to writing reports.  We’d all benefit from getting chapter and verse on what CPP is doing.

Wolverhampton sits at C2. But there looks to be a clear path to C1 if it boosts the level of surveys and tightens up management across the TMOs.

St Albans is also at C2. The council must speed up repairs and improve engagement if it wants to climb up to C1.

The RSH explains how it uses satisfaction TSMs in the reports for BCP and Wolverhampton. Good, we could do with more of this. The satisfaction figures at St Albans seem low. We could have done with some analysis of this from the RSH.

A summary of the RSH reports is below.

Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council (BCP)

RSH Grade	C1
TSM for overall satisfaction	81% (not mentioned in report)
Safety and Quality Standard	“Meets the outcomes” “Accurate and up-to-date” understanding of most homes 100% stock survey by April 26 with plans to refresh Survey covers HHSRS with data used to drive asset management strategy Only 20 homes do not meet DHS but will by March 26 Strong reporting to BCP Homes Advisory Board “Effective, efficient and timely” repairs service – 94% of emergency and 82% of non-emergency completed on time Plans to make further improvements Increased damp and mould budget Proactive at identifying and rectifying damp and mould – specialist operatives attend at first visit Good management of tall buildings (nine between 11m and 18m with six over 18m) – all FRAs completed with no life-critical fire-safety defects – high rise engagement strategy agreed with residents BCP demonstrated compliance across the six health and safety areas plus smoke/carbon monoxide alarms Fixes safety remedials quickly Internal and external reviews of compliance get acted on Good response to self-referral on safety compliance from June 2024
Neighbourhood and Community Standard	RSH “gained assurance” of compliance Recruited extra staff to ASB team now integrates with council’s community safety team Uses triage to prioritise cases Better outcomes and higher satisfaction (last TP12 is 56% – figure not in report – would have been good if RSH did give latest figure)
Tenancy Standard	Complies 10% sample check on allocations – audits provide assurance that policy followed and triggered refresher training e.g. on fraud awareness Tailored support plans
Transparency, Influence and Accountability Standard	“Respectful, fair and positive culture” Holds a lot of information about tenants but needs to enhance data across all protected characteristics BCP considers impact of new policies/service changes on tenants with protected characteristics 84% of tenants felt BCP treated them with respect (a rare citing of TSM in RSH reports) “At the meetings we observed…BCP welcomed tenants’ input” Tenants “actively involved” in reviewing the call centre, fire safety policy and new tenancy agreements TSMs show complaints handling improving (up from 34% to 40% – figures not cited) Learning from complaints captured and reported to Cabinet HOS data shows that maladministration rate has climbed from 63% to 73%) – not mentioned by RSH
RSH engagement	Not mentioned

 

Cheshire Peaks and Plains

RSH grade	C1
TSM for overall satisfaction	73% (not mentioned in report)
Safety and Quality Standard	“Appropriate systems” for health and safety “Accurate and up to date record of the condition of its homes” “Effective, efficient and timely repairs” Changing processes to address no access
Neighbourhood and Community Standard	Delivering required outcomes Detering and tackling ASB and hate incidents
Tenancy Standard	Complies Lets homes in fair and transparent way – monitored by board
Transparency, Influence and Accountability Standard	Delivering required outcomes Good understanding of tenants including vulnerability Board needs assurance that this data is used effectively Feedback from tenants/scrutiny reviews influences decisions Complaints used to improve services (no Landlord Performance Report from HOS)
RSH engagement	Closely monitor financial performance (V2)

 

City of Wolverhampton (Wolverhampton Homes ALMO plus three TMOs)

RSH grade	C2
TSM for overall satisfaction	66%
Safety and Quality Standard	Stock condition survey for only 40% of homes in last five years Non-decency = 4.75% (will be clearer as survey more homes) Compliant on health and safety – need to improve reporting on low/medium risk fire risk remedials Council is improving data management with external validation Repairs service compliant (95.4% of non-emergency/98.7% of emergency on time) – need to improve comms with tenants including via TMOs
Neighbourhood and Community Standard	“Effective approach to dealing with ASB and hate crime” Council needs to improve “assurance” that “its managing agents act promptly”
Tenancy Standard	·         Compliant
Transparency, Influence and Accountability Standard	“Respectful, fair and positive culture towards tenants” Visible and accessible senior leaders RSH saw tenants question and challenge performance Need to get better at “tailoring” services Quality and range of information to tenants compliant but improvements needed across TMOs Mobile app for repairs/other services positive – but need to keep striving to ensure comms with tenants are relevant/timely RSH says council working to understand drop in TSMs (council’s own report shows mixed picture – overall satisfaction down 1%, time taken for repairs up 3% but neighbourhood contribution down 6% – Accuity says “changes are relatively small and tend to follow the general trend across the sector…The Council shouldn’t be unduly worried about these changes as satisfaction remains good” (not cited by RSH) “Tenant representatives play a central role as key consultees” ·“Effective arrangements to enable tenants to engage” with further improvements on the way ·“Complaints process is accessible, simple and publicised” Analyses and learns from complaints/feedback (HOS maladministration rate of 59% versus peers on 80% – not cited by RSH)
RSH engagement	RSH will engage on stock survey, data quality and tailoring

 

St Albans City and District Council

RSH grade	C2
TSM for overall satisfaction	54%
Safety and Quality Standard	“Good understanding” of homes – 93.5% surveyed since 2019 98% of homes meet DHS with capital investment programme in place Compliant on heath and safety bar some weakness in reporting on remedial works RSH says generally OK on repair service – plans in place to improve speed of jobs (55% repair satisfaction – 49% satisfied with time taken to complete repairs from TSMs not cited in RSH report)
Neighbourhood and Community Standard	“Clear approach” to ASB Improvements needed as to how tenants can report ASB/hate crime and on monitoring by the council
Tenancy Standard	Generally OK – but need to get better at monitoring outcomes
Transparency, Influence and Accountability Standard	St Albans “needs to strengthen” knowledge of tenants’ characteristics to “ensure it is delivering fair and equitable outcomes” “Limited formal meaningful opportunities for tenants to influence” albeit “recent improvements” Weaknesses on dealing with and learning from complaints (HOS reports 100% maladministration rate versus peers on 77%)
RSH engagement	RSH will continue to engage on weaknesses identified at inspection – St Albans already taking action to rectify these