3 Improving the Department's oversight
12. Pathfinders have been given the freedom to
explore new approaches to housing market renewal, but Departmental
oversight of the Programme provides limited assurance over value
for money. Recognising that each pathfinder area had local challenges,
the Department took a non-prescriptive, 'enabling' role towards
the Programme. This gives individual pathfinders the scope to
develop their strategies, policy and governance arrangements.[22]
In the early years, pathfinders were required to provide updates
on monthly expenditure, quarterly commentaries on progress and
published annual reports. In response to criticisms from the Select
Committee on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in its March
2005 report Empty Homes and Low-demand Pathfinders,[23]
the Department took a more hands-on approach, requiring Pathfinders
to report against an increased number of indicators covering inputs,
outputs and outcomes.[24]
13. More recently, however, the Department has
transferred responsibility for day-to-day liaison with pathfinders
to Government Offices and it planned to transfer strategic oversight
of the Programme to the new Homes and Communities Agency from
2009. Some Government Offices had attempted to align area-based
initiatives funded by central Government at a regional level,
while others have been much less involved. The Department considered
that these different approaches reflect the scale and need for
Pathfinder intervention in the different regions.[25]
14. Substantial differences exist between Pathfinders'
achievements. These differences are dependent on their overall
strategy and the stage reached in the Programme, particularly
in regard to demolitions, properties acquired and refurbished,
and new homes built. Figure 3 demonstrates the range of
expenditure and activity.[26]
Figure 3: The level of spend and activity varies considerably between pathfinders
| MINIMUM
| MAXIMUM
|
| Expenditure 2003-07 (£ million)
| 27.6
| 169.9
|
| Number of homes acquired
| 226
| 2,655
|
| Number of homes demolished
| 239
| 2,655
|
| Number of homes refurbished
| 20
| 10,434
|
| Number of new homes built
| 0
| 338
|
15. To measure the overall success of the Programme the Department
tracks the number of low demand and vacant dwellings in pathfinder
areas. This allows it to assess progress against its target to
close the gaps in vacancy rates and house prices between pathfinder
areas and their respective regions by one third by 2010. Performance
against these targets has varied considerably between pathfinders.
For example, although the gap in house prices between regional
and pathfinder areas has reduced in all pathfinder areas, in some,
house prices were still less than two thirds of the regional equivalent.
Overall, between 2002 and 2006 low demand for properties fell
in pathfinder areas (by 42%) but it fell less than in England
as a whole (44%).
16. It is also unclear whether the changes in
housing markets in pathfinder areas are due to pathfinder intervention
or to wider economic and demographic factors.[27]
Increases in house prices might reflect general trends in housing
markets nationally and the increasing Buy-To-Let market. Speculative
investment has also added an average of £10,000 to the cost
of acquiring properties for clearance. Improvements in vacancy
rates might also reflect demographic changes such as increased
migration from within the European Union.
17. The Department does not routinely collect
information from comparable low demand neighbourhoods outside
the Programme. The National Audit Office found that housing markets
in local authorities chosen for pathfinder intervention have,
on the whole, performed slightly better than those in local authorities
without pathfinder intervention. The Department considered that
the Programme was making a positive contribution.[28]
Pathfinders have developed wider frameworks to monitor and report
on their effectiveness using indicators such as reducing the number
of properties in the lower Council Tax bands; reducing the number
of homes in unfit condition; increasing resident satisfaction
with their neighbourhood; increasing rates of owner occupation;
and increasing average household incomes.[29]
Other initiatives include a 'vitality index' which measures and
monitors a set of socio-economic indicators, including house prices,
vacancy rates, educational attainment, income and morbidity; and
a 'sustainability index' covering the housing market, the local
economy, crime and the local environment, to measure improvements
in the area.[30]
22 C&AG's Report, para 1.7 Back
23
Committee on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Eighth Report
of Session 2004-05, Empty Homes and Low-demand Pathfinders,
HC 295-I Back
24
C&AG's Report, paras 2.21, 2.25 Back
25
Q 19 Back
26
C&AG's Report, paras 3.6-3.10 Back
27
C&AG's Report, paras 3.14-3.17 Back
28
Qq 2, 24, 47, 51, 92; C&AG's Report, paras 3.2-3.5 Back
29
C&AG's Report, para 3.3 Back
30
Qq 24, 103; C&AG's Report, para 3.4
Back
|
