Supplementary Memorandum by the Office
of the Deputy Prime Minister (DEC 01(a))
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 In its Memorandum submitted to the Committee
on 17 November ODPM indicated that it would submit a Supplementary
Memorandum on the following issues:
— assessment of individual local authority
(LA) performance; and
— achievements in the social sector.
2. ASSESSMENT
OF LA PERFORMANCE
2.1 Since April 2002 Government Offices
for the Regions (GORs) have provided quarterly reports on the
performance of individual LAs in working towards delivery of the
decent homes target. The reports provide information on barriers
to delivery, planned work by the LA, planned work by the GOR,
report on work that had been planned the previous quarter as well
as an assessment of whether or not the LA was at risk of non-delivery
of the target. The reasons for LAs being classed as at risk ranged
from lack of a robust business plan to lack of resources and uncertainty
about the outcome of a transfer ballot.
2.2 The number of LAs classed as at risk
changed with each quarterly report. At the last report on this
basis (June 2003) 101 out of 256 LAs that had owned stock when
the target was introduced were reported as at risk of non delivery.
It is important to note that the degree of risk varies considerably—from
LAs facing relatively minor challenges to those with substantial
problems.
2.3 A revised reporting system has now been
introduced with the first reports giving the local authority position
at end October 2003. The aim was to provide sharper performance
assessments and to provide information on progress towards option
appraisal sign-off (see section 7 of previous Memorandum).
2.4 Assessment of individual LA performance
is now based on a traffic light classification. Each LA is classed
as Red, Amber/Red, Amber/Green or Green for both their ability
to deliver the target by 2010 as well as their ability to reach
option appraisal sign-off by July 2005. This revised reporting
system is based on an informal assessment by Government Office
and the Community Housing Task Force using whatever information
they have available.
2.5 The current position of the 256 LAs
that owned stock at the baseline date of 1 April 2001 is given
in Table 1. The broad equivalent to the "at risk" classification
under the previous system is red and amber red. 100 authorities
are assessed as being in these two categories in terms of their
ability to meet the 2010 target. There are 113 authorities classed
as red or amber-red in relation to option appraisal sign off,
87 of which are also red or amber-red on delivering by 2010.
Table 1
MATRIX OF OVERALL AND OPTION APPRAISAL SIGN
OFF ASSESSMENTS
OA sign-off
assessment
| Overall assessment |
| | | |
| Total | |
| | | |
| Red | Amber/Red
| Amber/Green | Green
| |
Red | 8 | 2
| 0 | 1 | 11 |
| Amber/Red | 9 | 68
| 20 | 5 | 102 |
| Amber/Green | 3 | 6
| 71 | 3 | 83 |
| Green | 0 | 4 |
9 | 47 | 60 |
| Total | 20 | 80
| 100 | 56 | 256
|
| |
| | | |
2.6 The purpose of categorising authorities is so we
can work with those at most risk of not meeting the target and
those who need support with option appraisals to help them develop
solutions that will deliver decent homes to their tenants. This
list of authorities in each category therefore changes over time
as authorities put effective strategies in place that, when implemented,
will result in delivery.
3. ASSESSMENT OF
RSL PERFORMANCE
3.1 The Housing Corporation is developing a risk register
for RSLs. The Corporation's asset management database is enabling
regulators to identify those RSLs at risk of failing to meet the
target and they will work with them to ensure they have plans
and adequate resources to tackle the problem. This may include
targeting major repairs grant on the most acute cases. The risk
register will be ready by the end of the year.
4. ACHIEVEMENTS IN
THE SOCIAL
SECTOR
4.1 On the basis of the most recent LA and RSL data (their
returns for 2002-03) it would appear that:
— between April 2001 and March 2004 the number of
non-decent properties will have been reduced by around 500,000;
— the total reduction in non-decent properties since
1997 will be nearly 1 million by March 2004; and
— we will achieve the milestone of reducing the
April 2001 number of non-decent properties by a third in the course
of 2004, a few months later than the original date of March 2004.
4.2 Initial analysis indicates there are two main reasons
why progress has been slower than anticipated:
— in 2002-03 local authorities spent 6% less (£150
million) on delivering decent homes than indicated in their plans
for the year; and
— some local authorities have increased their estimation
of the problem, making the target more difficult to achieve.
4.3 Work is in hand to understand why this is the case
and the implications this might have for the achievement of the
2010 decent homes target. In particular we need to understand:
— the extent to which the shortfall will be compensated
for by higher figures than now forecast for 2004-05;
— how far the decision to apply for a programme
that brings in additional funding delays existing plans for reducing
numbers of non decent homes;
— the extent to which the figures for 2002-03 are
lower than expected because LAs arrange their work programmes
to tackle building elements one at a time eg windows first, bathroom
next then roof repairs etc—with the consequence that the
homes do not become decent until all the programmes are complete;
— how changes to procurement practice have taken
longer than planned reducing the amount of work commissioned during
the year; and
— whether some LAs have misinterpreted the target
and their estimate of the proportion of the stock that is non
decent.
| 
