Radian RATE Programme STAR Survey Results April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report April 2018

Transcription

1 Radian RATE Programme STAR Survey Results April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report April 2018

2 Executive summary This report summarises the results of the continuous STAR survey of Radian s residents, covering the interviews conducted with a total of 2920 residents 2415 tenants and 505 home owners in the period from 1 April 2017 to 31 March The survey results are highly accurate overall within a sampling error of ± 1.7% at the 95% confidence level and can be taken as a robust and representative picture of the views of all Radian residents. Key findings The 2017/18 scores hold up well against both the 2015/16 and the 2016/17 survey scores, with increases on both previous years across 10 of the 19 main performance indicators (including the Net Promoter Score) For tenants, satisfaction with the overall Radian landlord service increased from 86.9% in 2015/16 to 90.6% in 2017/18, with the net promoter score rising from 29 to 37 over this same period When compared to Radian s peer group, the overall landlord score for tenants puts Radian comfortably in the top quartile, just outside the top decile; the Radian shared owner score is the second highest in the peer group and well within the top decile, while the leaseholder score is just outside the average score for the top third of peer group associations For home owners, satisfaction with the overall Radian landlord service has declined since 2016/17, from 74.3% down to 70.9%, albeit that the 2017/18 score is still higher than the 2015/16 satisfaction score of 68.1% For all residents, satisfaction with the overall Radian service has increased from 83.7% in 2015/16 to 87.2% in 2017/18, up nearly 2 percentage points in each of the last two years The net promoter score has also increased from 21 in 2015/16 to 27 in 2017/18, a six point increase Some noticeable improvements in the service provided by Radian over the three year period from 2015/16 to 2017/18 include increases in residents trusting Radian, being treated fairly and the overall quality of the home In contrast, there are some service areas where there have been decreases in satisfaction over the three year period, including satisfaction with service charges, with Radian listening to and acting on residents views, with Radian s reputation, with Radian consulting and involving residents and with how Radian deals with repairs and maintenance. Overall, the 2017/18 picture of resident satisfaction is evidence that Radian continues to improve its overall service to customers in a difficult operating environment for both social housing landlords and their residents This report updates the previous interim report of the STAR results for the year from 1 April 2017 to 31 December Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 2

3 Contents Page Executive Summary 2 1 Introduction 4 2 Comparisons with the 2015/16 & 2016/17 STAR surveys Comparisons with previous surveys tenants Comparisons with previous surveys home owners Comparisons with previous surveys all residents 6 3 Comparisons with Radian s peer group 9 4 Analysis by tenure group Tenants by tenure group Home owners by tenure group All residents 15 5 Analysis by area 18 6 Analysis by key diversity characteristics Analysis by age and ethnic group Analysis by disability, arrears and housing benefit status 22 7 Welfare advice and support 24 8 Alarm service for sheltered tenants (HfOP) 25 9 Satisfaction indices analysis by key attributes Customer profile 28 Annex 1 Survey method 31 A1 Sample design and accuracy of the results 31 A2 Deriving the satisfaction indices 32 A3 Net Promoter Score 33 Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 3

4 1 Introduction This report summarises the results of the continuous STAR survey of Radian s residents, covering the interviews conducted with a total of 2415 tenants and 505 home owners residents in total - in the period from 1 April 2017 to 31 March This report updates the previous interim report of the STAR results for the year from 1 April 2017 to 31 December Shore Consult, an independent consultancy, compiled this interim report, using the survey results provided to Radian by TTi Global Research, the independent market research company responsible for conducting the STAR survey interviews. Details of the survey method are included as Annex 1 to this report. A full set of detailed Tables are also available. This interim report focuses on all residents, with additional analysis by tenure group, area and demographic characteristics where appropriate. 2 Comparisons with the 2015/16 & 2016/17 STAR surveys 2.1 Comparisons with previous surveys - tenants Figure 2.1 below illustrates the changes in average tenant satisfaction with the key services provided by Radian between 2015/16 and 2017/18, focusing on the main satisfaction indices (see Annex 1 for an explanation of how the satisfaction indices are derived). Figure 2.1: Tenant satisfaction indices compared /16 to 2017/ / / /16 Landlord 87% 87% 88% Home 83% 84% 84% Overall 82% 84% 84% Perception 81% 83% 83% Consultation 80% 82% 83% Bases All tenants: 2015/16 = 2400; 2016/17 = 2098; 2017/18 = 2415 Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 4

5 Figure 2.1 shows that average tenant satisfaction with the delivery of key services in 2017/18 has improved compared to 2015/16 on the overall landlord index but there have been slight decreases in satisfaction across all the other indices over the three year period shown, albeit within only a few points. The net promoter scores (NPS) for tenants over the three year period shows a marked improvement in 2017/18, rising to a score of 37, compared to a score of 29 in both 2015/16 and 2016/ Comparisons with previous surveys home owners Figure 2.2 below illustrates the changes in average home owner satisfaction with the key services provided by Radian between 2015/16 and 2017/18, focusing on the main satisfaction indices (see Annex 1 for an explanation of how the satisfaction indices are derived). Figure 2.2: Home owner satisfaction indices compared /16 to 2017/ / / /16 Sales 76% 79% 80% Landlord 75% 76% 78% Home 75% 78% 79% Overall 74% 76% 77% Perception 73% 74% 76% Consultation 72% 76% 75% Bases All home owners: 2015/16 = 484; 2016/17 = 381; 2017/18 = 505 Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 5

6 Figure 2.2 shows a decline in home owner satisfaction with each of the main services in each year between 2015/16 and 2017/18, with between three and five percentage point decreases over the three year period. The two services with the greatest decline in satisfaction for home owners (with a 4 point drop since 2016/17 in each case) are services to the home dissatisfaction with service charges as value for money emerging as a particular problem, as Table 2 below shows and consultation services. In line with the apparent decline in satisfaction in 2017/18 amongst home owners with the main services provided by Radian, compared with previous years, the net promoter score (NPS) for home owners in 2017/18 has also decreased, from -2 in 2016/17 to -17 in 2017/18, a decline of 15 points. Chapter 4 of this report looks in more detail at the levels of satisfaction for both leaseholders and shared owners and identifies more precisely which group affects the lower levels of satisfaction with Radian services. 2.3 Comparisons with previous surveys all residents Table 2 compares the 2017/2018 STAR survey results with the results of the STAR surveys conducted by Radian in both 2015/16 and 2016/17. The performance scores are ranked by the 2017/18 scores, in descending order, for ease of interpretation. Table 2 highlights the following: The 2017/18 scores hold up well against both the 2015/16 and the 2016/17 survey scores, with increases on both previous years across 10 of the 19 main performance indicators (including the Net Promoter Score) In particular, satisfaction with the overall landlord service has increased from 83.7% in 2015/16 to 87.2% in 2017/18, up nearly 2 percentage points in each of the last two years, and is evidence that Radian continues to improve its overall service to customers in a difficult operating environment for both social housing landlords and their residents Some other noticeable improvements in the service provided by Radian over the three year period from 2015/16 to 2017/18 include increases in resident trusting Radian, being treated fairly and the overall quality of the home In contrast, there are some service areas where there have been decreases in resident satisfaction over the three year period, including: a decrease of 7 percentage points since last year in satisfaction with service charges from 73% in 2016/17 down to 66% in 2017/18 a decrease of 6 percentage points since last year in satisfaction with Radian listening to and acting on residents views from 72% in 2016/17 down to 66% in 2017/18 other more minor decreases in satisfaction showing a decline of between 2 and 3 percentage points since last year include with Radian s reputation, with Radian consulting and involving residents and with how Radian deals with repairs and maintenance. Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 6

7 Table 2: Comparisons with 2015/16 and 2016/17 STAR surveys all residents Percentages satisfied with each service, based on total respondents; bases vary and percentages do not total 100 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 2015/ / /18 % % % Radian has friendly and approachable staff 89.5% 90.3% 90.6% Overall quality of home 88.2% 88.8% 90.5% Condition of property 86.7% 87.8% 88.1% Overall landlord service 83.7% 85.5% 87.2% Rent as value for money 83.5% 86.6% 86.5% Your neighbourhood as place to live 86.4% 86.4% 86.3% Radian treats you fairly 82.3% 82.5% 84.7% I trust Radian 79.2% 81.0% 83.7% Radian provides effective & efficient service 77.5% 80.7% 83.5% Radian is providing the service I expect 80.8% 82.4% 83.5% Would recommend Radian to friends/family 81.5% 82.5% 82.5% Rate info from landlord as good 79.7% 79.5% 80.4% Opportunities to make views known 80.4% 79.3% 79.4% Repairs and maintenance service 73.5% 75.4% 72.3% Radian consults & involves residents 78.1% 74.9% 72.1% Listens to and acts on your views 70.2% 72.0% 66.0% Service charges as value for money 71.7% 72.9% 65.5% Radian has a good reputation in my area 68.2% 68.0% 64.6% Net Promoter Score Landlord index 85.3% 85.7% 85.9% Home index 83.2% 83.6% 81.9% Overall index 82.6% 82.8% 80.9% Perception index 81.8% 82.1% 79.6% Consultation index 81.6% 81.1% 78.9% Sales index (shared owners) 79.1% 80.3% 76.0% Satisfied with alarm service 89.4% 100.0% 88.9% Satisfied with welfare advice 93.4% 94.1% 94.8% Satisfied with sales process 88.7% 87.2% 88.0% Satisfied with how defects handled 50.5% 58.5% 45.5% TOTAL RESPONSES (=BASE) Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 7

8 Table 2 also shows a decline in satisfaction amongst tenants in sheltered housing with the alarm service (from a position of full satisfaction last year to 89% satisfaction this year), the service being used last year by one in every five tenants (21%). Satisfaction has increased slightly with the welfare advice and support service, up 1 percentage point since last year amongst the 25% of residents (both shared owners and tenants) who received this service, as Table 2 shows. For shared owners, satisfaction with the sales process has held up since 2015/16 but satisfaction with how defects are handled has declined significantly since last year, down by 13 percentage points from 59% in 2015/16 to 46% in 2017/18, and we would suggest further work to understand the basis of this decline. Figure 2.3 below illustrates the changes in average resident satisfaction with key services provided by Radian between 2015/16 and 2017/18, using the satisfaction indices results shown at the foot of Table 2 above. These indices are derived from the individual performance indicators to represent a shorthand average satisfaction level for the key service areas (see Annex 1 for an explanation of how these indices are derived). Figure 2.3: Satisfaction indices compared /16 to 2017/18, all residents 2017/ / /16 Landlord 86% 86% 85% Home 82% 84% 83% Overall 81% 83% 83% Perception 80% 82% 82% Consultation 79% 81% 82% Sales 76% 79% 80% Bases All residents: 2015/16 = 2884; 2016/17 = 2479; 2017/18 = 2920 Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 8

9 Using these satisfaction indices, Figure 2.3 shows that resident satisfaction with the overall landlord service has stayed constant since 2015/16, although all other satisfaction indices show a slight decline compared to the previous two years, albeit the decreases are mostly within 2 or 3 points. The exception is the sales index (which applies to home owners only) decreasing by 4 points since 2016/17, mainly as a result of a marked decline in satisfaction with the defects process, as discussed above. 3 Comparisons with Radian s peer group Table 3 compares the current overall satisfaction with Radian as a landlord with the satisfaction scores for this key indicator amongst Radian s peer group associations, as provided by HouseMark s benchmarking data at December The HouseMark data cover surveys that may have been conducted at any time in the period from April 2015 to December 2017, with the Radian results covering the full survey period April 2017 to March The peer group associations have been selected on the basis that their organisations provide both general needs and sheltered housing, that they carry out STAR surveys and submit the data to HouseMark for both tenants and owners and that they also manage more than 100 leaseholders or shared owners (in order to ensure that the survey results are reliable). Table 3 shows that Radian compares very well with this peer group on overall satisfaction with the landlord. For example: The Radian score for general needs and HfOP tenants for overall satisfaction with the landlord (90.5%) is almost within the top decile but does sit comfortably within both the top quartile and the top third fourth highest in the group of 29 peer associations The Radian score for leaseholder satisfaction with the overall landlord service (63.2%) is just outside the average score for the top third, albeit Radian lies sixth in the list of the 22 associations reporting their leaseholder results The Radian score for shared owner satisfaction with the overall landlord service (76.4%) is the second highest in the peer group and within the top decile (and the top quartile) of the 20 associations reporting their shared owner results Taken together, these are very encouraging scores and indicate that Radian is amongst the top performers in its peer group, albeit less so for services to leaseholders. Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 9

10 Table 3: Satisfaction with landlord service peer group comparisons Landlord Percentages satisfied with each service, based on total respondents; bases vary and percentages do not total 100 Year of survey Units managed General needs & HfOP Leasehold River Clyde Homes 2015/ % 62.7% Shared owners DCH Group 2016/ , % 62.3% Hafod HA 2015/ % 55.3% Radian 2016/ % 63.2% 76.4% Black Country HG 2016/2017 1, % 65.0% Twin Valley Homes 2015/ % 65.4% 58.9% Grampian HA 2015/ % 63.9% 74.5% Fortis Living 2016/ , % 33.3% 55.6% Chevin HA 2015/ % 50.0% 53.2% Pennine Housing / % 59.0% 42.0% Pennaf HG 2015/ % 59.2% 42.2% Joseph Rowntree HT 2016/2017 2, % 80.2% Progress HG 2016/2017 6, % 76.7% Housing Solutions 2016/2017 4, % 65.1% 65.9% Yarlington HG 2015/ % 41.7% 42.9% Tower Hamlets CH 2015/ % 54.0% City West HT 2015/ % 56.5% Salix Homes 2016/2017 8, % 60.4% Eastend Homes 2015/ % 60.7% Richmond HP 2015/ % 67.2% Together HA 2017/ , % 58.3% 57.5% Scottish Borders HA 2015/ % 45.5% Orbit Group 2015/ % 65.5% Catalyst Housing 2015/ % 52.1% Gateway HA 2016/2017 2, % 45.0% 36.0% Peabody Group 2015/ % 40.0% 48.0% Southern HG 2016/ , % 44.7% Origin HG 2015/ % 47.6% 31.8% Phoenix CH 2015/ % 42.0% Peer group average scores Top quartile 90.3% 64.2% 74.6% Top third 89.4% 63.7% 71.9% Mean 82.3% 54.3% 56.5% Median 85.4% 57.4% 56.6% Lower third 73.1% 42.2% 41.1% Bottom quartile 69.2% 41.3% 39.0% Source: HouseMark STAR survey benchmark scores, general needs and HfOP tenants, leaseholders and shared owners, as at December 2017; Radian scores for the period April 2017 to March 2018; no separate Total resident scores are available from HouseMark Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 10

11 4 Analysis by tenure group 4.1 Tenants by tenure group Table 4.1 compares the 2017/18 survey results by the main tenant tenure groups, ranked in descending order by the total tenant scores for ease of interpretation. Table 4.1: Tenant satisfaction with key services by tenure group tenants only Percentages satisfied with each service / agreeing with each statement, based on total responses; % do not total 100 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS All Tenants General needs Tenure group HfOP Intermed rent Market rent % % % % % Radian has friendly and approachable staff 92.3% 91.2% 92.7% 95.5% 92.9% Overall quality of home 91.8% 90.1% 95.8% 94.2% 90.8% Overall landlord service 90.6% 89.2% 95.3% 92.2% 86.7% Condition of property 89.4% 87.0% 96.2% 91.2% 87.8% Radian is providing the service I expect 88.3% 86.9% 92.9% 90.0% 83.7% Rent as value for money 88.0% 87.9% 92.0% 86.7% 78.6% Radian treats you fairly 87.8% 85.7% 92.0% 91.2% 87.8% Your neighbourhood as place to live 87.2% 84.5% 94.6% 89.7% 85.7% Radian provides effective & efficient service 86.6% 85.0% 89.9% 90.2% 82.7% I trust Radian 86.5% 84.8% 91.5% 90.0% 77.6% Would recommend Radian to friends/family 86.2% 84.3% 88.2% 91.0% 85.7% Rate info from landlord as good 81.8% 80.1% 88.9% 80.2% 83.7% Opportunities to make views known 81.7% 80.7% 86.8% 81.7% 76.5% Repairs and maintenance service 79.7% 79.2% 83.7% 78.9% 73.5% Radian consults & involves residents 74.2% 73.4% 81.1% 72.4% 65.3% Listens to and acts on your views 69.9% 67.9% 74.3% 73.2% 66.3% Service charges as value for money 69.0% 66.3% 82.1% 66.7% 64.3% Radian has a good reputation in my area 68.3% 68.3% 75.2% 61.7% 66.3% Net Promoter Score Landlord index 88.0% 86.9% 90.6% 90.2% 85.0% Home index 83.4% 82.1% 87.6% 84.8% 80.1% Overall index 82.5% 81.5% 85.2% 84.1% 79.4% Perception index 81.1% 80.4% 82.3% 82.9% 78.8% Consultation index 80.3% 79.4% 83.1% 81.5% 76.5% Satisfied with alarm service (HfOP only) 88.8% % - - Satisfied with welfare advice (tenants) 95.4% 94.8% 96.7% 97.0% 87.5% TOTAL RESPONSES (=BASE) Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 11

12 Table 4.1 highlights the following: HfOP tenants tend to give the highest scores on most indicators, following the usual pattern found in previous Radian STAR surveys, but the scores are generally quite similar across all the tenant groups, albeit general needs and market rent tenants tend to give the lowest scores HfOP tenants give particularly high scores relative to the other tenure groups for how Radian deals with repairs and maintenance (84%), for satisfaction with service charges as value for money (82%) and for Radian consulting and involving tenants (81%) For general needs tenants, their highest scores focus on the friendliness of staff (91% of general needs tenants are satisfied with this), on the quality of the home (90%) and on the overall landlord service (89%) In common with intermediate and market rent tenants, general needs tenants score quite low on satisfaction with service charges as value for money and Radian s reputation, with relatively low scores across these three groups on key consultation elements, including Radian consulting and involving residents and listening to and acting on residents views Intermediate rent tenants tend to have higher scores than general needs and market rent tenants but not as high as HfOP tenants, being particularly satisfied with the friendliness of staff (96%), with the quality of their home (94%) and with the overall Radian landlord service (92%) Market rent tenants have scores generally lower in most cases than general needs tenants, being particularly satisfied with the friendliness of staff (93%), with the quality of the home (91%) and with the overall Radian landlord service (87%). Table 4.1 also shows that, for the 21% of HfOP tenants who used the alarm service in the last year, 89% expressed themselves satisfied with the service. On welfare advice, Table 4.1 also shows that, for the 27% of tenants using the Radian welfare and advice service in the last year, the vast majority (95%) were satisfied with the service, with 88% of market rent tenants satisfied. This is a service that continues to perform well for customers. Figure 4.1 below illustrates the comparisons in tenant satisfaction indices for the different tenant groups in the period 2017/18, using the results shown in Table 4.1 above. This confirms the picture from Table 4.1, with HfOP and intermediate rent tenants the most satisfied on average with each of the main service provided by Radian, and general needs and market rent tenants the least satisfied in general. The differences in satisfaction with the Radian service between the different tenant groups are illustrated best by the net promoter scores, which are 50 for intermediate rent tenants, 48 for HfOP tenants, 31 for general needs tenants and 24 for market rent tenants. Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 12

13 Figure 4.1: Tenant satisfaction indices compared by tenure group Market rent Inter HfOP Gen needs Landlord index 85% 87% 90% 91% Home index 80% 82% 85% 88% Overall index 79% 81% 84% 85% Perception index 79% 80% 83% 82% Consultation index 77% 79% 81% 83% Bases Tenants; General needs = 1494; HfOP = 424; Intermediate = 399; Market rent = Home owners by tenure group Table 4.2 compares the 2017/18 survey results by the two types of home owners leaseholders and shared owners ranked in order by the total owner scores for ease of interpretation Table 4.2 highlights the following: There is a clear pattern evident from these detailed results, namely, that leaseholders are significantly less satisfied with the services they receive than shared owners and give lower scores on all but three of the main indicators - satisfaction with service charges as value for money, with the repairs and maintenance service and with information from the landlord Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 13

14 Table 4.2: Home owner satisfaction with key services by type of owner % satisfied with each service / agreeing with each statement, based on total responses; % do not total 100 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ALL OWNERS Owners by tenure group Leaseholders Shared owners % % % Overall quality of home 84.2% 74.6% 90.9% Radian has friendly and approachable staff 82.6% 80.9% 83.8% Condition of property 82.0% 70.8% 89.9% Your neighbourhood as place to live 82.0% 76.1% 86.1% Rent as value for money 74.0% % Rate info from landlord as good 73.7% 75.6% 72.3% Overall landlord service 70.9% 63.2% 76.4% Radian treats you fairly 69.9% 67.5% 71.6% I trust Radian 69.9% 64.6% 73.6% Radian provides effective & efficient service 68.7% 60.3% 74.7% Opportunities to make views known 68.3% 65.1% 70.6% Would recommend Radian to friends/family 65.1% 53.6% 73.3% Radian consults & involves residents 61.6% 60.3% 62.5% Radian is providing the service I expect 60.4% 50.7% 67.2% Service charges as value for money 48.9% 49.3% 48.6% Listens to and acts on your views 47.5% 45.0% 49.3% Radian has a good reputation in my area 46.5% 35.9% 54.1% Repairs and maintenance service 37.0% 40.2% 34.8% Net Promoter Score Sales index 75.9% % Landlord index 75.5% 70.6% 79.0% Home index 74.6% 72.4% 76.1% Overall index 73.6% 71.0% 75.4% Perception index 72.7% 70.0% 74.6% Consultation index 72.3% 70.6% 73.5% TOTAL RESPONSES (=BASE) Satisfied with sales process (shared) 87.8% % Satisfied with how defects handled (shared) 45.3% % Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 14

15 Table 4.2 also shows that, on all other indicators, leaseholders score lower, and in some cases, markedly lower than shared owners, particularly on indicators relating to perceptions of Radian. For example: 60% of leaseholders feel that Radian provides an effective and efficient service, compared to 75% of shared owners, a 15 percentage point gap 54% of leaseholders would recommend Radian to friends and family, compared to 73% of shared owners, a 19 percentage point gap 51% of leaseholders feel that Radian is providing the service they expect, compared to 67% of shared owners, a 16 percentage point gap 36% of leaseholders feel that Radian has a good reputation in their area, compared to 54% of shared owners, an 18 percentage point gap These differences in satisfaction with the Radian service between leaseholders and shared owners are illustrated best by the net promoter scores shown in Table 4.2, which are minus 36 for leaseholders, compared to minus 4 for shared owners. In respect of the satisfaction indices, Table 4.2 shows the extent of differences between the two groups on these, with shared owners having higher average scores on all indices by between 2 and 8 percentage points. 4.3 All residents Table 4.3 summarises the survey results for all Radian residents by tenure group for 2017/18, ranked in descending order by the total Radian scores for ease of interpretation. Tenants are generally considerably more satisfied than home owners with the services provided by Radian, a trend that has persisted across all resident satisfaction surveys conducted by Radian over the years indeed, this is a universal trend across the whole social housing sector as well For example, 90.6% of tenants are satisfied with the overall landlord service, compared to 70.9% of home owners, a gap of 21 percentage points Home owners score quite well on aspects of their home, such as its overall quality and condition, and on the neighbourhood as a place to live, reflecting in part the investment they have made in purchasing their property Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 15

16 Table 4.3: Satisfaction with key services by tenure Percentages satisfied with each service / agreeing with each statement, based on total responses; % do not total 100 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS All Tenants Owners residents % % % Radian has friendly and approachable staff 90.6% 92.3% 82.6% Overall quality of home 90.5% 91.8% 84.2% Condition of property 88.1% 89.4% 82.0% Overall landlord service 87.2% 90.6% 70.9% Rent as value for money 86.5% 88.0% 74.0% Your neighbourhood as place to live 86.3% 87.2% 82.0% Radian treats you fairly 84.7% 87.8% 69.9% I trust Radian 83.7% 86.5% 69.9% Radian provides effective & efficient service 83.5% 86.6% 68.7% Radian is providing the service I expect 83.5% 88.3% 60.4% Would recommend Radian to friends/family 82.5% 86.2% 65.1% Rate info from landlord as good 80.4% 81.8% 73.7% Opportunities to make views known 79.4% 81.7% 68.3% Repairs and maintenance service 72.3% 79.7% 37.0% Radian consults & involves residents 72.1% 74.2% 61.6% Listens to and acts on your views 66.0% 69.9% 47.5% Service charges as value for money 65.5% 69.0% 48.9% Radian has a good reputation in my area 64.6% 68.3% 46.5% Net Promoter Score Landlord index 85.9% 88.0% 75.5% Home index 81.9% 83.4% 74.6% Overall index 80.9% 82.5% 73.6% Perception index 79.6% 81.1% 72.7% Consultation index 78.9% 80.3% 72.3% Sales 75.9% % TOTAL RESPONSES (=BASE) Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 16

17 Table 4.3 also highlights that home owners score significantly lower than tenants on the main services that Radian provides, however, including: 60% of home owners agree that Radian is providing the service they expect, compared to 88% of tenants, a 28 percentage point gap 49% of home owners are satisfied that their service charges are value for money, compared to 69% of tenants, a 20 percentage point gap Only just over a third of home owners (37%) are satisfied with how Radian deals with repairs and maintenance, compared to 80% of tenants, a 43 percentage point gap Similar differences in satisfaction are evident in the main consultation indicators, in particular for example, 48% of home owners are satisfied that Radian listens to their views and acts on them, compared to 70% of tenants, a 22 percentage point gap. Figure 4.3 below illustrates the tenure comparisons in resident satisfaction indices in 2017/18, using the results shown in Table 4.3 above. The Figure emphasises that home owners are markedly less satisfied on average than tenants with all the key elements of the Radian service, by between seven and nine points across all the indices. For example, the landlord index score for tenants is 88%, compared to 76% for home owners; and the overall index for tenants scores 82%, compared to 74% for home owners. The marked differences in satisfaction with the Radian service between home owners and tenants is illustrated best by the net promoter scores, which are 37 for tenants and minus 17 for home owners, a 54 point gap. Figure 4.3: Satisfaction indices compared by tenure group Owners Tenants All residents Landlord 76% 88% 86% Home 75% 83% 82% Overall Perception Consultation 74% 73% 72% 82% 81% 81% 80% 80% 79% Sales 76% 76% Bases: Tenants = 2415; Home owners = 505; All residents = 2920 Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 17

18 5 Analysis by area Table 5 summarises the survey results by area. The scores are ranked by the All residents scores, in descending order, for ease of interpretation. Table 5: Satisfaction with key services by area all residents Percentages satisfied with each service, based on total respondents; bases vary and percentages do not total 100 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ALL RES Area Avon Lwood Rother Solent Thames % % % % % % Radian has friendly and approachable staff 90.6% 93.7% 87.0% 91.8% 89.8% 88.9% Overall quality of home 90.5% 95.4% 87.8% 91.7% 89.8% 87.4% Condition of property 88.1% 91.3% 87.0% 89.7% 88.5% 83.6% Overall landlord service 87.2% 92.3% 91.9% 88.8% 85.7% 83.3% Rent as value for money 86.5% 90.6% 89.4% 87.9% 84.3% 84.1% Your neighbourhood as place to live 86.3% 88.9% 84.6% 87.0% 85.1% 85.6% Radian treats you fairly 84.7% 87.9% 86.2% 86.6% 83.6% 81.6% I trust Radian 83.7% 86.2% 83.7% 87.2% 81.6% 80.5% Radian provides effective & efficient service 83.5% 88.2% 88.6% 85.8% 82.1% 78.8% Radian is providing the service I expect 83.5% 86.7% 85.4% 85.4% 80.9% 82.4% Would recommend Radian to friends/family 82.5% 87.4% 87.0% 83.9% 82.4% 76.9% Rate info from landlord as good 80.4% 82.1% 85.4% 79.6% 79.6% 80.5% Opportunities to make views known 79.4% 85.0% 80.5% 82.7% 76.2% 76.1% Repairs and maintenance service 72.3% 74.4% 79.7% 75.6% 69.1% 70.0% Radian consults & involves residents 72.1% 77.3% 79.7% 74.0% 69.6% 68.3% Listens to and acts on your views 66.0% 71.7% 70.7% 69.6% 62.2% 62.2% Service charges as value for money 65.5% 68.1% 81.3% 69.3% 62.8% 60.1% Radian has a good reputation in my area 64.6% 68.4% 78.0% 68.0% 62.5% 58.2% Net Promoter Score Landlord index 85.9% 89.3% 87.6% 87.2% 85.4% 82.4% Home index 81.9% 83.9% 82.3% 83.4% 81.3% 79.4% Overall index 80.9% 83.5% 81.9% 82.2% 80.2% 78.5% Perception index 79.6% 82.1% 80.5% 80.5% 79.1% 77.5% Consultation index 78.9% 82.0% 80.5% 80.3% 77.6% 76.8% Sales index 75.9% 76.9% % 75.6% 78.3% Satisfied with alarm service (HfOP only) 88.9% % 75.0% 93.8% Satisfied with welfare advice (tenants) 94.8% 95.1% 89.1% 94.7% 95.8% 95.2% Satisfied with sales process (shared) 88.0% 87.1% 89.9% 86.8% 91.7% Satisfied with defects handling (shared) 45.5% 40.3% 44.9% 47.2% 50.0% TOTAL RESPONSES (=BASE) Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 18

19 Table 5 highlights that there is a clear pattern evident in the results by area, with Longwood and Avon residents generally scoring the highest on the main indicators and Thames residents scoring the lowest, with the Rother and Solent scores in the middle, albeit the Rother scores are higher than the Solent scores on every indicator. These differences are best summarised by the net promoter scores (NPS) that are also shown in Table 5. The Avon and Longwood net promoter scores are the highest and very similar (40 and 42 respectively), with the Rother NPS at 34 and the Solent NPS at 26. The Thames net promoter score is only 11, however, giving emphasis to the gap in satisfaction with the customer experience amongst Thames residents compared to residents in other areas of Radian s operations. In respect of differences in satisfaction between residents in the different areas, Table 5 shows that there are some noticeable highs and lows. For example: 81% of Longwood residents are satisfied with service charges as value for money, a significantly higher score than the other four areas 92% of residents in both Longwood and Avon are satisfied with the overall landlord service, compared to 83% of Thames residents 94% of Avon residents and 92% of Rother residents are satisfied with the friendliness and approachability of Radian, compared to 87% of Longwood residents 80% of Longwood resident are satisfied with how Radian deals with repairs and maintenance, compared to 69% of Solent residents and 70% of Thames residents. Table 5 also shows that 89% of HfOP tenants who used the alarm service in the last year are satisfied with the service, although satisfaction amongst Solent HfOP tenants dropped to 75% - only 12 Solent HfOP residents used the alarm service last year, however, and allowance should be made for sampling error resulting for this small sample. Table 5 shows that the majority of residents (95%) are satisfied with the welfare service, although Longwood residents are the least satisfied (89%). Table 5 also shows that shared owners in Thames are marginally the most satisfied with the sales process (92% satisfaction, compared to 87% in Avon), but there are only minor differences by area in satisfaction with the defects process. Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 19

20 6 Analysis by key diversity characteristics 6.1 Analysis by age and ethnic group Table 6.1 summarises the survey results for all residents by the age of head of household and by ethnic group. The scores are ranked by the 60+ age group, in descending order, for ease of interpretation. Table 6.1: Satisfaction with key services by age of head of h/h and ethnic group Percentages satisfied with each service, based on total respondents; bases vary and percentages do not total 100 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Age of head of household Ethnic group Under 35 to ME White 35 British % % % % % Overall quality of home 86.6% 88.4% 94.8% 88.2% 91.4% Condition of property 86.6% 84.2% 93.3% 84.6% 89.3% Radian has friendly and approachable staff 88.4% 90.4% 92.2% 91.4% 91.1% Overall landlord service 84.4% 84.5% 92.1% 88.2% 88.3% Your neighbourhood as place to live 85.3% 83.2% 90.1% 85.5% 86.8% Rent as value for money 85.3% 84.1% 89.6% 82.0% 86.5% Radian treats you fairly 84.9% 82.4% 88.0% 83.3% 85.1% I trust Radian 83.6% 80.3% 87.8% 84.2% 84.1% Radian is providing the service I expect 84.0% 81.0% 87.4% 83.3% 84.8% Radian provides effective & efficient service 82.5% 81.9% 86.8% 83.7% 84.4% Rate info from landlord as good 78.1% 76.7% 85.5% 82.4% 80.6% Would recommend Radian to friends/family 84.0% 81.0% 84.8% 81.9% 82.7% Opportunities to make views known 78.5% 76.2% 83.8% 75.6% 81.0% Repairs and maintenance service 63.6% 69.9% 79.3% 67.4% 75.1% Radian consults & involves residents 70.0% 69.1% 77.0% 69.7% 73.8% Service charges as value for money 64.3% 59.7% 72.4% 64.7% 65.4% Listens to and acts on your views 64.3% 63.2% 70.5% 60.6% 67.4% Radian has a good reputation in my area 65.6% 61.1% 69.0% 64.3% 66.0% Net Promoter Score Landlord index 84.2% 84.3% 88.7% 85.3% 86.4% Home index 79.3% 79.9% 85.4% 79.5% 82.5% Overall index 79.3% 79.5% 83.5% 79.5% 81.4% Consultation index 77.6% 77.4% 81.5% 78.1% 79.4% Perception index 79.0% 78.8% 81.2% 78.5% 80.0% Sales index (shared owners only) 75.5% 77.4% 74.5% 83.3% 76.1% Satisfied with alarm service (HfOP only) - 0.0% 88.5% 0.0% 87.5% Satisfied with welfare advice 94.7% 93.1% 96.5% 94.2% 94.9% Satisfied with sales process (shared) 95.5% 91.2% 71.2% 95.8% 86.0% Satisfied with defects handling (shared) 39.3% 49.3% 47.0% 70.8% 45.3% TOTAL RESPONSES (=BASE) Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 20

21 Table 6.1 highlights the following: In respect of age, and in line with previous Radian STATUS / STAR surveys, the oldest age group (those aged 60 or over) give higher scores on every indicator, reflecting their different expectations of the service and a seemingly more loyal attachment to Radian as a landlord than younger tenants The differences in scores between the other two age groups are much more mixed and no clear pattern emerges of either younger age group giving higher or lower scores consistently than the other group, indicating that age is not a significant determinant of satisfaction amongst those aged under 60 years The net promoter scores (NPS) give some indication of the views of the different age groups, with the under 35s having the lowest score at 19, compared to a score of 23 for those aged 35 to 59 and a score of 37 for those aged 60 and over In respect of ethnic group, there are generally only relatively minor differences in scores between White and minority ethnic households across most indicators, although minority ethnic residents tend to give lower scores than White British residents For the most part, these differences in scores between minority ethnic and White British residents are not marked and would not be considered meaningful, but there are some interesting exceptions for example: 67% of minority ethnic residents are satisfied with the repairs and maintenance service, compared to 75% of White British residents an 8 percentage point gap 61% of minority ethnic residents are satisfied that Radian listens to and acts on their views, compared to 67% of White British residents a 7 percentage point gap Consultation with minority ethnic residents may be an area worthy of further exploration, since minority ethnic residents also score noticeably lower than White British residents on the other two main consultation indicators opportunities to make their views known (5 percentage points lower than White British residents) and on Radian consulting and involving residents (4 percentage points lower) Otherwise, the net promoter scores illustrate that the views of minority ethnic and White British residents are quite close about the Radian services they receive, with the minority ethnic net promoter score at 27, compared to 29 for White British residents. Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 21

22 6.2 Analysis by disability, arrears and housing benefit status Table 6.2 summarises the survey results by the disability status of the household, by whether the household is in arrears and by whether the household receives housing benefit (either partial or full). The scores are ranked by disability status, for ease of interpretation. Table 6.2: Satisfaction with key services by disability, arrears and HB status Percentages satisfied with each service, based on total respondents; bases vary and percentages do not total 100 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Disabled h/h member Arrears status Receiving HB Yes No Yes No Yes No % % % % % % Radian has friendly and approachable staff 91.0% 90.5% 95.8% 90.4% 93.1% 89.0% Overall quality of home 90.6% 90.4% 87.5% 90.6% 92.3% 89.3% Overall landlord service 89.4% 86.6% 87.5% 87.2% 91.7% 84.3% Condition of property 88.8% 87.9% 80.6% 88.3% 90.1% 86.8% Your neighbourhood as place to live 87.4% 85.9% 83.3% 86.3% 87.2% 85.6% Radian is providing the service I expect 86.7% 82.6% 86.1% 83.4% 89.5% 79.6% Rent as value for money 86.6% 86.4% 83.6% 86.5% 89.2% 84.5% Radian treats you fairly 85.7% 84.4% 91.7% 84.6% 89.0% 82.0% Radian provides effective & efficient service 84.8% 83.2% 84.7% 83.5% 88.0% 80.6% I trust Radian 84.8% 83.3% 80.6% 83.7% 87.8% 81.0% Would recommend Radian to friends/family 81.6% 82.8% 83.3% 82.5% 86.5% 80.0% Repairs and maintenance service 81.4% 69.7% 76.4% 72.2% 81.8% 66.2% Rate info from landlord as good 79.4% 80.7% 81.9% 80.4% 83.0% 78.7% Opportunities to make views known 79.1% 79.5% 81.9% 79.4% 83.0% 77.1% Radian consults & involves residents 72.7% 71.9% 72.2% 72.1% 77.2% 68.8% Listens to and acts on your views 67.8% 65.5% 73.6% 65.8% 72.9% 61.5% Service charges as value for money 66.7% 65.2% 58.3% 65.7% 71.7% 61.6% Radian has a good reputation in my area 66.6% 64.0% 62.5% 64.6% 72.5% 59.5% Net Promoter Score Landlord index 86.6% 85.7% 85.8% 85.9% 89.1% 83.8% Home index 83.4% 81.5% 79.1% 82.0% 84.3% 80.3% Overall index 81.8% 80.7% 79.9% 80.9% 83.5% 79.2% Perception index 80.4% 79.4% 79.3% 79.6% 82.1% 78.1% Consultation index 79.0% 78.9% 79.0% 78.9% 81.7% 77.1% Sales index (shared owners only) 72.2% 76.1% % 64.3% 76.3% Satisfied with alarm service (HfOP only) 86.7% 91.1% 88.9% 94.7% 78.8% Satisfied with welfare advice (tenants) 95.0% 94.7% 91.7% 95.0% 97.4% 90.4% Satisfied with sales process (shared) 55.6% 89.0% 88.0% 71.4% 88.4% Satisfied with defects handling (shared) 22.2% 46.2% 45.5% 14.3% 46.2% TOTAL RESPONSES (=BASE) Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 22

23 Table 6.2 highlights the following: On disability status, the scores given by households with one or more disabled household member are only marginally albeit consistently - higher on all the main indicators than those given by households with no disabled members, and the net promoter scores are 28 and 27 respectively, illustrating this small gap in satisfaction In respect of arrears, the Table shows household in arrears (those owing 600 or more to Radian) and those not owing anything at the time of the survey There is no general pattern visible from these arrears status comparisons that, would indicate that either those in arrears or those not in arrears are more or less satisfied than the other groups this is illustrated by the net promoter scores of 24 for those in arrears compared to 27 for those not in arrears The main exception to this lack of a general pattern is satisfaction with service charges as value for money, where those in arrears score 58% compared to 66% for those not in arrears, an 8 percentage point gap Otherwise, it is interesting to note that those in arrears are more satisfied on a number of key indicators than those not in arrears, such as agreeing that Radian treats its residents fairly (92% compared to 85% for those not in arrears) and agreeing that Radian is providing the service expected (86% compared to 83%) In respect of housing benefit receipt, households receiving full or partial housing benefit have higher scores on every main indicator than households who receive no benefit, illustrated by the net promoter scores those in receipt of benefit have a score of 42, compared to a score of 18 for those not receiving benefit indicating that paying full rent is a key determinant of resident satisfaction (or rather dissatisfaction) Satisfaction with service charges is a key difference, for example, between those on benefit and those not on benefit, with 72% of the former group satisfied compared to 62% of those not on benefit, a 10 percentage point gap Another key difference between the groups is satisfaction with the repairs and maintenance service, with 82% of those on benefit satisfied with the service, compared to only 66% of those not on benefit, an 18 percentage point gap. Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 23

24 7 Welfare advice and support We asked tenants and shared owners whether they had received advice and support from Radian on housing benefit or other welfare benefits in the past 12 months. A quarter of residents (25%) received welfare advice and support in the period between 1 April 2017 and 31 March Almost two residents in every five in receipt of housing benefit (37%) and more than half of those in rent arrears (54%) received welfare advice and support in this period. Figure 7.1 shows the percentage of residents receiving welfare advice and support by area, and the percentage of these who were satisfied with that service, and Figure 7.2 shows the same results by tenure group. Figure 7.1: Receipt of welfare advice and support by area tenants & shared owners Received welfare advice and support Satisfied with welfare advice received 95% 95% 89% 95% 96% 95% 37% 25% 25% 27% 19% 27% All areas Avon Longwood Rother Solent Thames Bases 2017/18: Avon = 413; Longwood = 123; Rother = 768; Solent = 862; Thames = 545 Total = 2711 Figure 7.1 shows that almost two residents in every five in Longwood (37%) received welfare advice in the last year, with 89% of them satisfied with the service the least satisfied of all areas. Solent residents score highest on satisfaction with the service (96% satisfaction), a service used by almost a fifth of Solent residents (19%) last year. Figure 7.2 below shows that 6% of shared owners used the welfare advice service last year, although they were the least satisfied of all users (78%). Market rent tenants, 8% of whom used the service last year, were the least satisfied tenant group with the service (88%), while the other tenant groups who used the service were all very satisfied with the service they received. Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 24

25 Figure 7.2: Satisfaction with welfare service by tenure tenants & shared owners only Received welfare advice and support Satisfied with welfare advice received 95% 95% 97% 97% 88% 78% 27% 28% 28% 25% 8% 6% All areas General needs HfOP Intermed rent Market rent Shared owners Bases 2017/18: General needs = 1494; HfOP = 424; Intermediate = 399; Market rent = 98; shared owners = Alarm service for tenants in housing for older people We asked HfOP tenants only whether they had used the alarm service in the last year, and Figure 8 shows the results. While one in five HfOP tenants (21%) had used their alarm in the last year, 89% expressed themselves satisfied with the service. We would recommend caution in interpreting the Solent result in view of the small sample size. Figure 8: Use of alarm service and satisfaction by area HfOP tenants only All tenants Rother Solent Thames 89% 89% 93% 73% 21% 21% 16% 23% Used the alarm service in last year Satisfied with alarm service Bases 2017/18: Rother = 215; Solent = 67 Thames = 141; All HfOP tenants = 423 Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 25

26 9 Satisfaction indices analysis by key attributes Table 9 shows the aggregated satisfaction index scores for all residents by a range of key attributes. These cover the main elements of the services provided by Radian, and are derived from the satisfaction scores for each individual service to provide an average single aggregated satisfaction figure, in order to more clearly identify how each service area is performing - see Annex 1 for an explanation of how these are derived. Table 9 provides a clear summary of resident satisfaction with the main Radian services and highlights the following: Amongst tenants, HfOP tenants have the highest average scores on the overall index (85%), the home index (88%), the consult index (83%) and the landlord index (91%) Market rent tenants have the lowest index scores of all the tenant groups, across all indices Amongst home owners, shared owners have higher average scores than leaseholders on all the main indices, outscoring the latter group by between 2 and 8 points Residents in Avon have the highest average scores on all the main indices (except for the sales index), followed closely by Rother and Longwood, while Thames residents consistently score the lowest on all the main indices by between 4 and 7 points lower than the average Avon scores with the exception of the sales index score, which is the highest score of all areas Residents living in houses give higher scores than resident in flats on all the main indices Residents aged 60 and over give the highest scores compared to the other two age groups on all the main indices the exception is the sales index, where the 60+ group score the lowest While White British households score higher than those from an ethnic minority on all the main indices, except for the sales index, the scores are very close points, indicating both that ethnic origin is not a determinant of satisfaction with landlord services and that there is no apparent bias on the part of Radian in how those services are delivered to different ethnic groups There are only minor differences in the index scores between households containing a disabled member and those without any disabled members Similarly, on arrears status, the scores for those in arrears and those with no arrears are very similar Residents in receipt of housing benefit have higher average satisfaction scores on all the main indices than those receiving no benefit. Radian STAR Survey April 2017 to March 2018 All Residents Report v1 April 2018 Page 26