EPN Tenant Scrutiny Panel Performance Management Framework (PMF) Report 2016-17 Quarter One Generated 25 July 2016 Gauge / Speedometer Key 1
EPNPMF AN Rent collected from current tenants as a % of rent owed (excl. arrears b/f) EPN (new calc. method) June 2016 100.12% 99.59% 99.17% This new method of calculating income collected was signed off by CWAC in March 2016 and replaces EPN PMF A as it is a more accurate and auditable way of calculating this indicator. (A / B) * 100, A = The actual rent and service charges collected year-to-date on current GN & HfOP tenancies (excluding garages), B = The actual net rent and service charges due year-to-date for all tenanted GN & HfOP properties (excluding garages). = (C / (A - B)) * 100 (HRA Transactions Report) A = Rent collected in year from current tenants B = Rent loss due to empty properties (voids) C = Rent and service charges due for the period (whether property is occupied or not and excluding arrears brought forward) We have collected over 100% of rental income over four consecutive months which is a great start to the year. Team are working extremely well together, which included a patch change which went ahead smoothly with officers and co-ordinators which has seen them continuing to take a proactive approach to their work. We have also doubled the number of Allpay licenses meaning more users can use the system at the same time. This will reduce the number of times a member of staff logs in to take a payment but is unable to do so as all the licences are being used, meaning the customer either has to wait or be called back to take the payment. Anyday Direct Debit Update: Allpay agreed with our procurement mangers savings calculations so we are just waiting for approval to procure the contract then work will commence with the assistance of Allpay to undertake the migration exercise to upload existing Direct Debits to the Allpay system. Intro to Secure Process: Meeting to take place middle of July with the Housing Manager to look at processes and where responsibility lies when taking the decision to either extend an introductory tenant for a further 6 months or make them secure at the end of the 12 months. Agreed needs to be a joined up approach if there has been a breach of their tenancy agreement for either rent arrears or anti-social behaviour. This joined up approach will ensure that the procedures, management of the case and the level of evidence acquired stand up to scrutiny and possible judicial review if we are challenged. 2
Benefit Cap: In June CWaC estimated that at least 27 EPN tenants could be potentially affected by the Benefit Cap which is coming in late Autumn 2016. The data scan provided from CWaC was a snap shot based on information available at the point in time. Due to the frequency of the data refresh at CWaC there could be additional new cases where changes have occurred. CWaC Housing Benefit will be scheduling in a visit to these affected tenants over the next few months. A meeting has been set up middle of July to discuss this in greater detail with our in-house Income Maximisation Advisors so that we can also contact them to see if anyone has disabilities/vulnerabilities within the household that we could assist with via DLA/PIP which would exempt them. It is also an opportunity to do an income and expenditure so that we can look at maximising their income so that they can make payments on the potential shortfall in their housing benefit. We will also be linking in with Engagement to make a start with looking at employment opportunities for those affected. Training: During June the Income Team have received a refresher on Discretionary Housing Payments (DHP) and the HELP scheme. This refresher was provided by Craig Ellis, Senior Assessment Centre Officer who is based at CWaC s Benefits Corporate Assessment Centre. He advised on the budget for DHP this year, which is 550k for 2016/17 which is an increase on last year and encouraged the team to continue to make referrals for DHP/HELP. It is also hoped that going forward the DHP application form will be available online. The official launch date is October but it is likely CWaC will undertake a pilot before this date. The Senior Income Officer attended HQN seminar "The Edge". From this good practices were shared from other social landlords on future working practices that may be able to be implemented within the Income Team eg Agile working working/paperless processes/using external intelligence software such as Call2Collect and Mobysoft Rent Sense The Income Maximisation Advisor has also attended a 2 day conference run by the Institute of Money Advisers (IMA). The purpose of this course was to give money advisors from across the country the chance to network and to discuss good working practices. Following on from this it is hoped in the next quarter that the Income maximisation Advisor will be approved as a Debt Relief Order (DRO) intermediary. Regular meetings with CWac Housing Benefit continue to be undertaken on a monthly basis. There are currently 179 tenants known to be on Universal Credit 3
EPNPMF BDN Rent arrears of current and former tenants as a percentage of rent due (excluding voids) June 2016 4.16% 4.89% 7.41% Rent arrears of both current and former tenants as a % of the total rent due (excludes void rent loss and arrears brought forward). Former arrears are net of any former arrears written off. (Current Tenant Arrears + Former Tenant Arrears) / (Gross Rent Debit - Void Rent Loss) * 100 No adjustments should be made for payments (including HB) We have maintained a rent collection rate of over 100% and reduced current arrears by 105,420 in the first quarter. In the same period former arrears increased by 38,433 and this is largely due to bailiff evictions and abandoned before a planned eviction which account for 63% of the former debt in quarter one, but only 18 of the 127 terminations. Over 50% of the tenants in this category had held their tenancy for 4+ years. We are finding courts are being more lenient by choosing to give tenants a last chance and during quarter one 34% (11/32) eviction applications resulted in the court approving the application to suspend and they were agreed upon terms. If they fail to keep up the payments the process of going back to court can take up to 12 weeks adding over 17K to former arrears, based on the 18 tenants and average rent of 80). An analysis of the main causes of former arrears between April 2014 and March 2016 is in its first draft but initial findings are clearly showing during 2015/16 tenants who were either evicted by the bailiff or abandoned before a planned eviction account for nearly 50% of the total former debt in that year but only 14% of all terminations. Further analysis of this cohort will inform what actions can be taken to reduce the number of failed tenancies, accounts taken to court and the level of arrears if the tenancy fails. To achieve the 8.02% target at the end of June we needed to collect an extra 27,680, and the delay in applying the Q4 (2015-16) and Q1 (2016-17) write-offs on the system will have had a negative impact on this indicator. 4
EPNPMF CN Former tenant arrears cash collected EPN (new calc. method) June 2016 This is the actual rent and service charge income received in the period from former tenants. Rent is considered to be collected from a former tenant when the tenancy has ended with arrears on the account, and a subsequent payment is made. Final payments made within one month of the end of the tenancy should be considered to be collected from current tenants The sum of all former income excluding garage and supporting people former income. We have had positive results from the former tenants incentive pilots with 5 new arrangements made bringing in an additional 83 per month. In line with the parameters approved at the last client contractor meeting the pilots will continue until the end of August and will be extended to include debts up to 1000, capped at 100 cases. Performance is currently 431 below what we collected during the same period last year and this lower collection rate could partially be attributed to the review of the terminated arrears progression rules implemented last year. This review increased the level of activity taken during the 4 week termination period to collect rent due up to the end of the tenancy and included the introduction of text messages. Our success in collecting rent during the 4 week termination period will have a downside on this measure because the rent collected during the 4 week termination period is classed as current income. Hence why this may be a contributory factor to the dip in former income collected compared to the same period last year, but would help contribute towards the increase in current income. 5
EPNPMF E Rent written off as a % of the annual rent debit June 2016 0.26% 0.47% 0.83% This PI measures the rent written off as a proportion of the rent roll. Rent written off is based on the total amount of rent (including service charges eligible for housing benefit) which is written off during the period benchmarked as unrecoverable. The amount written off includes both current and former tenant arrears. The rent roll is the total amount of potential rent (including service charges) which would be collected in the year on all General Needs and Housing for Older People dwellings (excluding garages) if they had been occupied at all times. Note this indicator can only ever increase over the course of the year, or remain constant if no write-offs are made in any given quarter. As such the figure is 'cumulative incremental' and re-sets at the beginning of a new financial year (for HouseMark purposes this is 1st April). (A / B) * 100, A = The actual value of rent and service charges written off year-to-date, B = The annual gross rent roll for the year. No write-offs have been requested or approved so far this year as we are waiting until CWaC approve the write-off list submitted at the end of March 2016 before we generate a new list for approval. The amount we can automatically write-off without CWaC approval has been reduced with effect from March 2016 from 30 to 20. 6
EPNPMF FN % of rent lost through dwellings being vacant June 2016 0.63% 0.86% 1.17% Also referred to as void loss, this should include rent loss on all void types. The dwelling may have been vacant for any reason, and includes dwellings that are unavailable to let. A/B*100, A = void rent loss, B = gross rent debit Appendix A shows the number of properties becoming empty has continued to be higher than the previous year hence the increase in void rent loss. An analysis of the reasons for tenancy terminations between April 2014 and March 2016 is in its first draft and will be used to inform what action we can take to help reduce tenancy turnover, and therefore void rent loss. We are also holding a workshop on 16 August to review the end to end void process to identify if there is any waste we can remove or reduce the time taken between each step in the overall process. On 4 May West Cheshire Homes stopped carrying out verification checks and reference requests due to issues of the pricing agreement with other RSLs. This has not only had an impact on our resources as we are having to do this verification work at offer stage but we are currently quantifying the impact of any delays in obtaining references on the void time. The property types becoming empty are not significantly different to the previous 2 years so the increase is void rent loss is due to the increase in the number of properties becoming void and the potential delays in obtaining references leading to a slight increase in the average relet time. 7
EPNPMF01N Average re-let (calendar days) - standard voids only (cumulative) June 2016 20.22 21.54 32.16 Housemark Def: This indicator measures the average time (in calendar days) to re-let vacant properties during the period benchmarked. It is calculated by dividing the total number of days standard re-let properties were vacant in the period, by the number of standard re-lets in the period. The number of days vacant of a standard re-let is the number of days between the tenancy end date and the tenancy start date. Note that the day the property goes vacant does not count as one day. Hence if a tenancy ends on a Sunday and is let the following day, these counts are a 0 day re-let time. Negative re-let times cannot exist. Note that certain types of lettings are excluded from this indicator, in particular; first / new lets; mutual exchanges; successions; and other lettings excluded as per the COntinuous REcording guidance. Re-lets that have previously undergone major works are also EXCLUDED from this calculation. A/B*100, A = total number of days taken to let the property in standard works only, B = the number of standard work properties that were let in the period Covalent formula = EPNOPV40/EPNOPV39 The number of properties becoming empty has continued to be higher than the previous year and an analysis of the reasons for tenancy terminations between April 2014 and March 2016 is in its first draft and will be used to inform what action we can take to help reduce tenancy turnover. We are also holding a workshop on 16 August to review the end to end void process to identify if there is any waste we can remove or reduce the time taken between each step in the overall process. Appendix A shows the average time taken to turnaround standard void properties improved significantly since 2014/15 with a reduction of nearly 10 days and this improvement has been maintained so far this year. The increase in the number of properties becoming void has had a slightly negative impact on void turnaround times in quarter one of this year, but historical performance shows quarter one void turnaround times improve at yearend. 8
EPNPMF02 % of properties accepted on first offer June 2016 91% 68.19% 51.99% This indicator measures the proportion of your properties that were accepted on the first offer, and is calculated by dividing re-lets to properties that were accepted on first offer by all lettings. Include only re-lets to properties that would require a core form as included in the most up-to-date core lettings guidance manual. Exclude first lets to new build properties and management lets. (A / B) * 100, Where A = The number of properties accepted on first offer. And where B = The total number of properties accepted. A property only counts in the denominator once it has been let, and only counts once no matter how many times it was refused. We continue to perform within the Top Quartile for the North West and All of England comparator groups and have only received 3 refusals so far this year. 9
EPNPMF03N % of repairs completed right first visit (M) June 2016 97.42% 93.3% 89.33% This is the number of repair visits completed by the operative without the need to return a second time because the repair was inaccurately diagnosed and / or the operative did not fix the problem, as a percentage of all responsive repair visits completed (emergency, urgent and routine combined). A repair is considered fixed at first visit when the operative has attended the property, identified, diagnosed and remedied the fault (using van stock), and carried out any making good before then leaving the property. Multiple trades: Where the job requires multiple trades who may follow on from each other, then the work would still be considered completed at first visit so long as each of the trades were completed in one visit. Replacement parts: If the job required specific replacement parts and the operative needed to return a second time with the correct parts because they were not part of his/her van stock, then this would not count as completed at first visit. No access: Where the operative is unable to gain access to the property, this will not be counted as a visit and should be excluded from the figures. How its measured (A / B) * 100, A = number of repair visits completed in the first visit, B = total number of repair visits completed in period June 2016 outturn is within target and above the Housemark North West Top Quartile (97.42%) but as anticipated is showing a downward trend. It is acknowledged that the level of Right First Time (RFT) has been inflated historically due to way the operatives have been completing the outcome of their visits. The visit outcomes are used to calculate the RFT % for example an unplanned visit is classed as not right first time and vice versa. Actions contained within the Repairs Improvement Plan will achieve greater compliance with operatives selecting the right visit outcome to reflect if a 2nd visit was planned or unplanned. This has started to show and the number of unplanned follow on repairs is higher than reported previously. Therefore performance will continue to be on a downward trend as a direct outcome of the Responsive Repairs Improvement Plan but we will achieve better quality information to enable management by fact. 10
EPNPMF04 % of tenants satisfied with the most recent repair June 2016 97.54% 96.4% 91.68% This indicator is to measure the percentage of residents who say they are very satisfied or fairly satisfied with the overall repairs service they received at their most recent responsive repair. (A/B)*100, A = the number of people very satisfied or fairly satisfied, B = The total number of people questioned We projected last month that we wouldn't see an upward trend in satisfaction with the most recent repair until July onwards because many of the new ways of working only came into effect from 1 June onwards. Peter Jones, Repairs and Maintenance Manager will present the Repairs Improvement Plan at the meeting. 11
EPNPMF05 % of emergency repairs completed within target (24 hrs.) June 2016 This indicator measures the number of emergency (priority 1) repairs completed within the landlord's target for repairs of this type, expressed as a percentage of the total number of emergency repairs completed. The repair time starts from the time the tenant first reports the repair not from the time it is ordered. The repairs time ends when the repair is actually completed, not when the completed repair is input into the computer. The definition of an emergency repairs is: Any defect that puts the health, safety or security of the tenant, or a third party, at immediate risk; or that affects the structure of the building adversely. Organisations should include all jobs that are treated locally as emergencies. We continue respond to every emergency repair within target. How its measured (A / B) * 100 A = The total number of emergency repairs completed yearto-date that were completed within target (e.g. within 24 hours of being raised). As with all reactive repairs with completion targets, the time must begin to elapse as soon as the resident has reported the repair to the landlord, NOT when the landlord raises the repair with a contractor. B = The total number of emergency repairs completed year-to-date. 12
EPNPMF08 Appointments kept as a % of appointments made June 2016 99.76% 98.43% 96.99% This measure expresses the number of appointments kept as a percentage of the number that were actually made. (A / B) * 100, A = Number of repairs appointments kept, B = Number of repairs appointments made Two visits have been recorded as being missed in terms of their appointment slot, but evidence has been supplied to show that both were in fact attended to within their original appointment slot. This will mean that 100% of appointments made were kept in June 16 which is great performance and a result of improved Planning processes. Internal processes however could have been tightened up on one appointment which had been brought forward as this was done at Tenant's Request which is not considered a FALSE status. The system however had not been updated, only the Planner comments explained what had happened. We continue to be ahead of the stretching target and have been so for the whole of Q1. 13
EPNPMF09 % of all tenants who have been evicted for rent arrears June 2016 0.34% 0.53% 0.66% This indicator measures the total (cumulative) number of evictions due to rent arrears over the period benchmarked expressed as a percentage of the average number of current tenancies for the period. (A / B) * 100, A = The number of tenants who have been evicted for rent arrears year-todate. B = The average number of current tenancies for the period, whether or not they are in arrears. This is calculated by; (The total number of current tenancies as at the beginning of the period PLUS the total number of current tenancies at the end of the period) divided by two. This denominator should remain relatively stable, unless there are significant changes to the tenanted stock profile throughout the course of the year. During the first quarter, 2 tenants have been evicted by the Bailiff (EVIC) and 14 tenants abandoned the property before the bailiff s appointment (EVAB). The team have been very proactive in taking early intervention in an effort to prevent evictions which are a last resort. They are continuing to work very closely with both internal and external partners so that we can offer support and help to vulnerable tenants to sustain their tenancies. An analysis of the main causes of former arrears between April 2014 and March 2016 is in its first draft but initial findings are clearly showing during 2015/16 tenants who were either evicted by the bailiff or abandoned before a planned eviction account for nearly 50% of the total former debt. Further analysis of this cohort will inform what actions can be taken to reduce the number of failed tenancies, accounts taken to court and the level of arrears if the tenancy fails. 14
EPNPMF10 % of properties with a valid gas safety certificate (M) June 2016 100% 100% 100% This measures the number of properties with a landlord owned gas appliance, for which the landlord holds a current, valid gas certificate to confirm that the annual safety check has been completed, when due, as a percentage of all properties with a landlord owned gas appliance. (A / B) * 100, A = The number of dwellings with a current valid gas safety certificate as at the end of the period. The landlord must hold a copy of the certificate. B = The number of dwellings for whom the landlord has a gas safety obligation under the Gas Safety (Installations and Use) Regulations 1998. Our 100% compliance with gas safety since December 2013 was broken in April when one property did not have a current gas safety certificate due to a data inputting error where the next service date was held against the decommissioned equipment and not the newly installed appliance. It was identified on a monthly report which showed both dates and as soon as this was spotted an appointment was made with the tenant and the gas safety check completed on 10 May 2016, it should have been done by 30 April. We are confident that no more Gas Safety Inspections will be missed as we have checked for discrepancies between the next service due and last service completion dates on keystone, the software the holds the servicing data. This exercise would have identified any dates held against decommissioned equipment 15
EPNPMF11 % of stage 1 complaints upheld June 2016 35.96% 54.89% 82.87% This is the number of stage one complaints upheld or partially upheld divided by the total number of stage 1 complaints closed. The definition of upheld is that the complaint was justified i.e. it was found in favour of the complainant. Including both those complaints that were fully upheld and those that were partially upheld. (A / B) * 100, A = The number of stage 1 complaints upheld year-to-date, B = The total number of stage 1 complaints closed year-to-date. We understand that getting our services right first time and being clear about what we do will reduce the number of complaints upheld. To help achieve this all methods of customer feedback will be captured and reported quarterly to EPN Managers. This will give a wider view of the themes causing dissatisfaction and actions agreed and progress against these will be reported back to this group. To capture the voice of the customer and gain a deeper understanding of how are services are being delivered during the month of September frontline staff will be collecting all expressions of dissatisfaction and the results will be used to inform service improvement plans. 16
EPNPMF12 % of properties achieving Decent Homes Standard (includes tenant refusals) June 2016 100% 100% 100% The number of General Needs, Supported Housing and/or Housing for Older People units/bed spaces meeting the Decent Homes Standard. Expressed as a percentage of the total stock. Landlords are not expected to make a home decent if this is against a tenant's wishes, as work can be undertaken when the dwelling is next void. These properties are not counted as non-decent until they are void. However, where works are required to maintain the structural integrity of the dwelling or prevent other components within the dwelling from deteriorating, or where a category 1 hazard must receive early attention, they should be counted as non-decent. A/B*100. Where A= the number of homes classified as decent and B = the total number of dwellings*100 Quarter 1 performance shows an improvement from the Year End position, Year End target exceeded, however, decency flow from decent to non-decent needs to be managed. Continual improvement against decency position has been achieved, despite not all contractors being on site during the first quarter; namely Bathrooms - Keepmoat and Electrical Rewires - Complete Electrics During the next quarter we will continue to encourage tenants who have previously refused to take up outstanding decency improvement work and target the 28 remaining Non Decent Dwellings. 17
EPNPMF13N % of properties with a SAP value less than 65 (2005 SAP methodology) June 2016 April 2015 onwards SAP methodology = 2012. Pre April 2015 SAP methodology 2005 was used. Number of properties with a SAP rating <65 (A) / total properties (B) (A/B)*100 During Quarter 1 we have reduced the number of properties with a SAP value less than 65 (which is deemed to be the fuel poverty line) from 802 to 707. This can be attributed to the impact of the performance of the newly appointed central heating contractor - Liberty Gas who are delivering above target and also to the continued re assessment of "rogue" SAP values held on IBS. We are comfortable that the Target for Quarter 2 (11/8% / 649 homes) will be achieved, however, Quarter 3 and Quarter 4 Targets will be challenging to achieve for the following reasons; Proposed External Wall Insulation programme for 2016/17 postponed; insufficient budget to allow this work to progress Insufficient budget to allow a Loft and Cavity Wall insulation programme Proposed 2016/17 Central Heating programme reduced from 480 installs to 410, The above programmes of work all have a positive impact on SAP values, and therefore will impact on the ability to achieve the Year End target. This will be raised with the Client Team at the next Monthly Capital Investment Programme meeting. 18
EPNPMF14 % of tenants satisfied with the landlords services overall (M) June 2016 87.15% 86.3% 83.78% (A/B) *100, A = the number of tenants very satisfied or fairly satisfied, B = total number of tenants surveyed. This is indicator is derived from a questionnaire survey conducted by Voluntas through the monthly repairs satisfaction survey, 110 tenants are surveyed monthly, the question is also asked in the STAR survey which is carried out biannually. The corresponding question is Taking everything into account, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the service provided by Plus Dane? We continue to be in the Housemark Upper Quartile for customer satisfaction with our overall services. The monthly satisfaction result for both May and June was 89% which achieved the target. However, due the dip in April and the year to date calculation we continue to be below target and project it will take some months to catch-up and achieve target. The main reasons for dissatisfaction in June relate to ASB within the neighbourhood, communication and repairs and maintenance service which is the risk associated with asking this question at the end of the transactional repairs survey. We are predicting that once the actions contained within the RMU Improvement Plan are embedded we should see satisfaction levels increase from August onwards. 19
EPNPMF15 % of tenants satisfied that their views are taken into account June 2016 72.28% 67.3% 57.43% This is indicator is derived from a questionnaire survey conducted by Voluntas through the monthly repairs satisfaction survey, 110 tenants are surveyed monthly, the question is also asked in the STAR survey which is carried out biannually. The corresponding question is How satisfied or dissatisfied are you that Plus Dane listens to your views and acts upon them"? (A/B)* 100, A =The number of very satisfied and fairly satisfied respondents, B = the total number of respondents to the question We continue to be exceed the upper quartile of Housing Providers in the Housemark Northwest Group with 84% of tenants telling us they are satisfied we take their views into account. The newly approved Tenant and Customer Engagement Group Strategy sets out Plus Dane s commitment to strengthen the voice of tenants and customers. We will monitor the impact of involvement from service improvement, customer satisfaction and value for money perspectives to ensure that involvement is productive and effective. 20
EPNPMF16 Average end to end time for all reactive repairs June 2016 5.66 6.72 10.61 This is defined as the average number of (calendar) days between the responsive repair being requested and its satisfactory completion including the day of request and the day of completion. Ultimately the date of satisfactory completion is decided by the landlord or its agent. All responsive repairs completed during the benchmarked period should be included. (A / B) * 100, A = the sum of the total number of calendar days taken to complete responsive repairs in the period, and B = the total number of responsive repairs completed in the period. Performance is within the Housemark Top Quartile when compared to all of England and 2nd Quartile when compared just to the North West. When agreeing appointments with customers who are in employment the appointment is usually made around their working patterns and we find this tends to prolong the length of the job as the first available appointment is not always the most convenient. The welfare reform changes has increased the number of customers in employment and we are finding those on low or zero hours contracts are reluctant to take time off work so its proving more difficult to agree the earliest available appointments with them. The impact of meeting our customer requirements is jobs are still being completed within the 20 day target but the appointment is being made 2-3 weeks in the future, which is extending the time taken to complete the repair. We are also naturally seeing an impact of the changes to Planner roles and responsibilities; the booking of follow on works from site; the keeping open of the same job number from end to end including the follow on visits; We believe that the overall benefits to customers to be achieved by making the changes to the management of follow on and job monitoring keeping the one job number will more than outweigh the perceived reduction in service that an upward shift in this outturn would indicate. 21
EPNPMF17 % customers satisfied with investment programme June 2016 Satisfaction of tenants with the capital investment programme provided by their landlord as defined as the percentage of all tenants, or a representative random sample of tenants, stating that they are: satisfied (that includes very satisfied or fairly satisfied) with the way their landlord delivers the Capital Programme. 2016/17 Quarter 1 Target - 97.5% (A/B)*100, A = The number of very satisfied and fairly satisfied respondents, B =Total number of respondents Quarter 1 performance has exceeded target. A new customer satisfaction procedure and form has been implemented the impact of which needs to be monitored going forward to determine the impact on return rates, performance and the quality of customer insight obtained from the forms. 22
EPNPMF18 % of customers satisfied with the way a complaint was handled June 2016 74.76% 59.9% 52.93% This measure is sourced from a landlord s internal survey of complainants, carried out following closure of the complaint. Ideally all, as opposed to a sample, of complainants should be surveyed once their case has been closed. (N / D) * 100, where N = Number of respondents very satisfied or fairly satisfied with the way in which their complaint was handled. Neutral options such as neither satisfied nor dissatisfied should not be included. and where D = Number of respondents who answered the specific survey question During quarter one 13 complaints have been closed. So far only two complainants have been surveyed and both expressed dissatisfaction with the way their complaint was handled. Due to the low numbers this PI is reported with caution and we are looking at ways we can increase the volume of feedback received from complaints. We have asked Voluntas if they have any ideas on how this can be achieved and they have advised they will come back to us in August with some proposals. 23
EPNPMF19 % of new very serious ASB cases responded to within 24 working hours (M) June 2016 Data Source REACT Software - The figure is derived from an automated report which is emailed automatically to nominated members of staff (Performance team - Mark Razbully) (Landlord s - Andrew Rooke). The report identifies all cases received within a date range (including the actual start and end date entered.) If the case has got no Actual date (date first contacted) this will also show on the report with a blank. It will show the target date the customer is to be contacted by. This is calculated by the system. When setting up the stages on the system it requires the number of days the officer has to take action. This takes into account weekends and bank holidays. The officer inputs the date the case was logged and the system calculates how long they have to respond and created this date. The report also shows the difference this is calculated by taking the date of response (actual date) and deducting the Target Date this gives the number of days difference.. The % has been calculated by. Count (In Target)/Total Number * 100. Count(Out Of Target)/Total Number *100 How its measured A = Total number of cases responded to in target in period (level 1 category), B = Total number of ASB cases received in period (level category 1), A/B*100 Excellent work by the team, not one case is out of target or unresolved. The processes we have in place are working. Relations with partner agencies continue to work well. 24
EPNPMF20 % of closed ASB cases that were resolved June 2016 98.69% 94.19% 90.83% Closed resolved cases refer to those cases closed in year-to-date where, in the professional opinion of the landlord, the ASB reported by the complainant(s) has ended or is no longer a cause for concern. Cases that have been investigated but no breach of tenancy or evidence of ASB is found, should also be recorded as a closed resolved case. (A / B) * 100, A = The number of ASB cases resolved year-to-date. B = The number of ASB cases resolved year-to-date (as in the numerator) PLUS the number of ASB cases closed but unresolved. Excellent work by the team, not one case is out of target or unresolved. The processes we have in place are working. Relations with partner agencies continue to work well. 25
EPNPMF21 % of MP and formal Member enquires dealt with in target. June 2016 This is the number of MP and formal member enquiries that were received within the month analysed that were closed and resolved in target. A / B * 100, where A = Number of Stage 1 complaints responded to in full within target, B = Number of all Stage 1 complaints responded to in full in quarter All MP enquiries have been responded to within target during this quarter. This is a result of the diligent controls built into the process to ensure we achieve the targets. Performance has improved each month since January 2016 when the MP enquiry monitoring was returned to EPN office to be monitored locally. 26
EPNPMF22 Leaseholder arrears as a % of the leaseholder charges for the previous 12 months June 2016 This measure expresses the service charge arrears outstanding at the end of the period benchmarked as a percentage of the total service charges due. (A / B) * 100, A = charge arrears at the end of the period benchmarked, B = charges due in period benchmarked Arrears to 30/6/2016 = 8,361.27, 12 month debit = 105,403.94. Will aim to improve the collection rate during the second quarter through a combination of earlier invoicing, a direct debit review, completion of the adjusted service charge accounts in July (rather than September) which will enable payment of large debit adjustments to be spread over 3 quarters rather than two, and going after our high level debtors through the Council solicitors. 27
EPNPMF23 % of offensive graffiti removed within 24 hours of receiving a report June 2016 It measures the average time (in hours) to remove one occurrence of offensive graffiti during the period benchmarked. (A / B) *100, A = number of offensive graffiti jobs completed within the time limit, B = total number of occurrences over the period No reports of offensive graffiti have been received in the fist quarter of this year. 28
EPNPMF24 % of current tenancies with profiling data logged (snapshot) June 2016 The total number of all current tenancies who have returned a customer profiling form as a percentage of the total number of current tenancies. (Excludes garages and leaseholders) (A/B)*100, A= the number of tenancies with profiling data logged, B = the total number of current tenancies (excluding refusals and exemptions) Target exceeded. We have developed a new Customer Review form to refresh and add to the information we hold about our customers. We are piloting this in the Netherpool Neighbourhood before rolling out to all neighbourhoods. This information will be used to help inform decisions about what services we offer and how. 29
EPNPMF25N % of stage one complaints responded to within target June 2016 This indicator is measured through the Customer Complaints (CCS) Access Database. Report = Formal Complaints In Target (A/B)*100, A = the number of complaints responded to within target (10 working days from date of acknowledgement), B = the total number of complaints received. We have maintained 100% compliance with this measure all year as a result of having diligent monitoring processes in place to ensure the complaint responses are completed within timescale. We have achieved 100% compliance with this measure for the last 2 years. 30
EPNPMF26N (+/- %) Variance Actual Spend Against Target completions (Capital Programme) June 2016 Each expenditure stream is calculated: Fire risk assessments, Asbestos, Garage sites, Small scale improvements Void, contingency -capital repairs & voids and profit share. Each stream has an actual spend which is compared to its expenditure target. The figure displayed is the % of the total spent. The target is a stepped target. The upper and lower limit values are within a 5% range either side of the projected cumulative quarterly spend. Calculation method = (C / B) * 100 A = Actual spend B = Target spend C = (A - B) The underspend in the capital budget at the end of quarter 1 is due to a three week delay in starting on-site for bathroom, electrical rewires and electrical testing works as the contracts had to be procured. There were also delays in submitting invoices for payment from the contractors delivering the fire risk assessment and asbestos works. 31
With effect from 1 April 2016 we started to measure current and former arrears as one due to the close relationship between the two. The following 2 KPI s are operational EPNPMF B Current tenant arrears as a % of the annual rent debit (excl. HB adj) June 2016 2.37% 3.2% 4.85% This indicator calculates the rent arrears of all current GN and HfOP tenants at the end of the period as a percentage of the annual rent debit (for the current financial year). This figure should include arrears due to late Housing Benefit payments and no adjustments should be made for this. This covers all General Needs and Housing for Older People rented stock (excluding garages). Court costs are separate sundry debts and should not be included in the calculation. Former tenant debts (even those which have followed a tenant to their current tenancy) are separate and should not be included in this calculation. (A / B) * 100, A = The actual value of current tenant rent and service charge arrears at the end of the reporting period, B = The annual rent debit for the current financial year. This is the net rent debit after deduction of rent loss due to voids. From 2016-17 this PI has been replaced in the PMF Framework with PMF BDN, current and former arrears. The working paper for the 2016-17 Income Targets projected current arrears will reduce by 130K during 2016-17, thus making the 2016-17 target for current arrears 3.48%. 32
EPNPMF D Former tenant arrears as a % of the annual rent debit June 2016 1.17% 1.69% 2.52% This indicator calculates the amount of former tenant arrears outstanding at the end of the period as a percentage of the total rent debit. It includes former tenant arrears from all GN & HfOP social rented dwellings (excluding garages). It includes former tenant s service charges, but would not include court costs or overpaid Housing Benefits which re sundry debts normally accounted for separately. This indicator does not include rent and service charge arrears that have been written off. As such this figure can reduce either through former tenant arrears being recuperated, or through them being written off. Note that 'set asides' should continue to be included as former arrears until they are formally written off. The delay in applying the Q4 (2015-16) and Q1 (2016-17) write-offs on the system has a negative impact on this indicator. (A / B) * 100, A = The actual value of former tenant rent and service charge arrears at the end of the reporting period, B = The total rent debit for the year. 33
PMF 1N: Average relet (Calendar days) Based on quarter one volumes the number of terminations is projected to be in line with previous years. Appendix A Number of terminations Q1 End of Year 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 Projection 129 102 117 443 446 468 Void turnaround time: Previous peformance shows the average relet time for standard voids at the end of Q1 improves over the year. 14/15 Q1-33.52 days: End of year 24.62 days 15/16 Q1-23.88 days: End of year 21.46 days 16/17 Q1-24.56 days: End of year target 23 days Legend: Number of voids Average days taken to relet 34