Agenda item

The Homes Sub-Committee is asked to receive a presentation providing an update on the Responsive Repairs Contracts.

The Sub-Committed considered a report set out on pages 35 to 51 of the agenda, which provided an update on repairs performance and procurement process, damp and mould overview and asset management update.

·       Councillor Lynne Hale – Cabinet Member for Housing

·       Susmita Sen – Corporate Director of Housing

·       Orlagh Guarnori – Finance Manager

·       Sarah Attwood – Finance Manager

·       Beatrice Cingtho-Taylor – Director of Housing, Homelessness Prevention & Accommodation

·       Mark Billings – Housing Solutions Transformation Lead

The item was introduced by Cllr Lynne Hale, the Cabinet Member for Housing and the officers. During the introduction the following was noted: -

·       Since August 2023, when the three new repair contracts went live, there had been a significant increase in the call volume – around 2000 calls per month, and in the additional repair orders – around 1500 per month.

·       Although the procurement was based on the data shared by the previous contractor, there had been a notion that there might have been some repairs suppression.

·       There had been issues in the contact centre, mainly in relation to a high level of sickness absence among the temporary staff.

·       Although the service was not work as well as it would be desired, due to the significant increase in the number of calls and the contractor’s capacity to deliver the higher than anticipated level of service, it was assured that the Council was aware of this and had plans to mitigate the impact. These included a refresh of the contact centre and a new training programme for staff.

Following the introduction, the Sub-Committee asked questions on the information provided. The first question asked for an explanation of the poor performance of the call centre in November 2023. Officers advised that the lower performance was caused predominantly by sicknesses amongst the temporary staff. It was also added that a similar situation occurred on the 2nd of January when a considerable number of staff were unwell. This had an impact on the overall performance for January. It was highlighted that over the next six to eight weeks, considerable changes would be implemented, which were expected to result in shorter wait times, with five minutes targeted by the end of March and four minutes by the end of May.

It was questioned whether, once the recruitment was completed, the staffing levels for the contact centre would be right or whether performance issues caused by staff shortages would be a reoccurring issue. It was explained by the officer that staffing levels had been informed by intelligence gathered over the last six months, so the level of provision should be correct. However, it was stressed that they would target part-time staff to support the team during peak periods. In addition to that, it was mentioned that in most contact centres, there would be a relatively high staff turnover – around 20% to 25% a year. Therefore, it was crucial to account for such a level of turnover in the plans.

The next question asked by the Sub-Committee mentioned the heating repair contractor's performance, particularly its low performance in November 2023, the time limit for emergency and non-emergency repairs and how performance would be managed. It was explained by the officers that the performance data provided by the repairs contractors was going through a validation process to ensure it was inaccurate. It was also explained that the targets were as follows – four hours to attend and 24 hours to complete an emergency repair, and 14 days to complete the non-emergency repairs. The officers acknowledged that they experienced many problems during the first winter period of the new contract which were in part caused by higher levels of demanded repairs than was resourced for in the contract. It was stressed by the officers that additional resources had been employed to address this in the last eight weeks. In addition to that, the Council had been working with the provider to prioritise emergency repairs, rather than following up on other works.

It was further challenged by the Sub-Committee whether this issue was also caused by the lack of stock required for repairs, for instance, boilers. It was explained by the officers that the problem was twofold. Firstly, the issue was around data and what types of stock they had and what parts were required. Secondly, there was a large number of repairs coming through.

The next set of questions asked why the recruitment process for contact centre staff did not start earlier, whether the Council had plans to replace temporary staff members with permanent ones, and what would be the financial implications of doing so. It was explained by the officers that the mobilisation happened with additional temporary staff members, which was caused by the previous contractor providing a list for the contact centre staff late. Therefore, until early July, the officers did not know how many members of staff were going to be transferred to support delivering the contact centre service. Only five people transferred to the new in-house contact centre, when the actual number of staff required was around 22 or 23 full-time employees. The officers explained that the temporary resource came into Croydon towards the end of June. It was also highlighted that in August the new IT system was introduced. The new system and the increased number of calls had required further additional members of staff to be brought in, and new members of staff would join at the end of February and early March.

Subsequently, the Sub-Committee asked a question on additional operatives provided by the contractors. The officers explained that the commercial model set up for the contractors assumed that the Council did not need to pay for operatives. The Council currently had been discussing with contractors how many additional supervisors would be required to manage the additional operatives. It was estimated that around three supervisors would be required.

A supplementary question was asked about performance management and the proportion of permanent to temporary staff currently in place. The officers explained that currently seven out of 23 members of staff were permanent. It was stressed that even though the service was predominantly run by temporary staff, it did not mean that the quality of service provided was particularly low. It was further explained that the performance problems were predominantly caused by an increase in demand, which resulted in longer call handling times than anticipated. It was assured that the culture was not an area of concern for the officers.

The next question considered the residents contacting the Council with an emergency and whether the staff handling calls would have the required information, for instance, on the location of stopcocks. The officers explained that currently, on the NEC system, there was no information about the location of stopcocks in each property. However, most of the stopcocks were usually located underneath a sink or in a cupboard in a shared area, and this would be included in the script for the staff.

A subsequent question related to the customer satisfaction improvement plan and the timescale for implementation. The officers explained that the improvement process had already started. For instance, the training and induction plan for the contract centre was ongoing, and further training would start at the end of February this year. The officers added that the current focus was on additional training for temporary staff to ensure accurate repair diagnostics. In addition, the Council would like to implement an IT tool repair finder around the beginning of April.

The next question asked about the monitoring of calls and whether there was a distinction between calls related to new issues and follow-up calls. The officers explained that they measured the number of calls coming in by the hour, and they monitored a ‘call failure demand’. It was further challenged by the Sub-Committee whether the follow-up calls were added to the notes for existing repairs or whether they were raised as new issues. The officers explained that they recently addressed this issue during a training session and the contact centre advisors were reminded always to ask whether a resident had reported the same repair in the last six months. This checked firstly whether there was an open job and secondly whether the job was attended in the last six months as the recall could be raised with the supplier.

A supplementary question was asked about using IT systems to identify existing jobs more effectively. It was explained by the officers that the supplier was working on the data validation and identifying how many requests were raised multiple times. It was also added by the officers that one of the system's capabilities was ‘heat mapping’ against each property to see how many jobs had been logged. It was also mentioned that the script asked an officer to check the repair history.

A question was raised about staff welfare and the level of sickness related absence. The officers explained that there had only been a considerably higher level of absence in November and December, which was predominantly caused by higher levels of flu and COVID-19. It was assured by the officers that there was no evidence that these absences were caused by an inappropriate amount of work.

The next question asked whether there was any monitoring of properties with a lack of repairs reported by residents. The officers explained that the Council had been working on tenancy inspections to identify potential fraud and subletting. It was also mentioned by the officers that heat mapping could be used to identify the lack of repairs and target these properties for inspection.

The next question asked about the key performance indicators (KPIs) set for the contractors and contractual penalties based on them. The officers explained that the validation process needed to be completed before the KPIs could be accurately assessed. Subsequently, the officers would work closely with the contractors to determine improvement areas and develop an appropriate plan. It was also highlighted by the officers that it was important to give the contractors very clear guidance regarding the minimum standards expected.

Subsequently, the Sub-Committee asked whether it would be possible for the residents to monitor the repair status in real-time. It was explained by the officers that this option was not currently available. However, the possibility of adding more information to the portal was being explored, including the ability to request appointments through the portal. This capability should be added between April and June this year, and before it was added it would be piloted on a selected group of residents.

The next question asked whether there was a log of informal complaints, as residents tended to be reluctant to make formal complaints, and if there was, whether there were any common themes. The officers explained that they referred to these informal complaints as issues, and tried to capture and record these either through the contact centre or through other officers who were in contact with residents.

Further information was requested on the timescale for turning legacy voids into good conditions. The officers explained that the target time was 12 days. However, at the end of December, performance averaged between 14 to 18 days. It was explained that there were some differences between how voids were measured in Croydon and other local authorities, especially around what is classified as a lettable void and major works void. It was also added that Croydon measured minor and major void similarly, which was an area officers would like to improve. A follow-up questioned the impact of Croylease on the void turnaround. The officers explained that the contractors undertook work on Croylease properties; however, it was not a focus for them over the last six months. It was also added that the main work in Croylease voids had been delivered by subcontractors.

The next set of questions related to the priority gas and heating service for vulnerable residents particularly whether vulnerable residents were prioritised in Croydon, how the effectiveness of the service was measured, how the Council planned to improve the gas service and whether other options would be considered if the lower performance continued. Officers explained that the NEC system stored data around vulnerabilities if they were provided by the residents. It was also added that contact centre staff asked the residents whether they believed themselves to be vulnerable, which led to further questions around their level of need. It was highlighted that most heating-related repairs between October and April would be classified as emergency repairs. The officers assured the Sub-Committee that when there were issues around emergency repairs, the supplier brought in additional resources, including apprentices and subcontractors. It was also highlighted that the officers expected the service to improve within the next three months.

A supplementary question asked about the reasons why the contractor did not have sufficient resources. The officers explained that the mobilisation period was shorter for one of the suppliers because the original contractor who had been awarded the contract pulled out. In addition, around the same time the Council had to focus on the delivery of a significant number of the landlord’s gas safety checks.

Further information was requested on the number of gas safety checks completed. Officers provided reassurance that performance had been improving, and the compliance level was around 99%. It was mentioned that last week, there were around 380 outstanding checks. However, around 30 checks a day were being performed, including force entry. It was also explained that the officers already had planned and scheduled checks that would be due in February and March. The officers provided assured that they were planning to be as close to 100% as possible by the end of the financial year (31st of March).

The next set of questions related to doable repairs including the considerable backlog in this area and whether the Council was trying to work with other contractors to take over some cases. The officers explained that the data indicating poor performance was being validated. Therefore, it could change materially. The officers suggested that currently, there was no need to bring in other contractors as KNT demonstrated a very clear resourcing and improvement plan. A supplementary question asked whether the other contractors would have sufficient resources to step in to support each other if needed. It was advised that this could not be confirm at this time and would only be explored if necessary.

The next question asked by the Sub-Committee considered the trends and progress on the stock survey. The officers explained that the trends could not be confirmed with certainty as the information was still being uploading into the APEC system. It was mentioned that by the end of December 33% of stock condition survey had been completed, and 40% completion was targeted by the end of March. The officers also reassured the Sub-Committee that a significant amount of work was being undertaken by the contractor to improve the access. It was also mentioned that the forced entry necessary for gas checks allowed the Council to use the opportunity to undertake stock condition surveys.

At the conclusion of this item the Chair thanked the officer for their engagement with the questions of the Sub-Committee.

Actions

Following the discussion of this item, the Sub-Committee agreed the following actions to follow-up after the meeting.

1. In response to a query about updating Energy Performance Certificates, it was agreed that further information would be provided on the number of recently reviewed Energy Performance Certificates on Council owned housing.
2. It was agreed that areas such as call centre staff performance management, ensuring the collection of all relevant data relating to repairs and updating residents on the status of their repairs would be reviewed by the Sub-Committee when it looked at the cultural transformation work (including customer experience) within the Housing service at its next meeting on 16 April 2024.

Conclusions

Following its discussion of this item, the Sub-Committee reached the following conclusions on the information provided: -

1. The Sub-Committee commended the team for the significant amount of work that has been delivered in a short space of time since the mobilisation of the new responsive repairs and heating contracts, particularly in the context of a larger than anticipated backlog of historic repairs.
2. The Sub-Committee agreed that data would be a key driver in the delivery of service improvement. As the service was going through the process of validating the data it was collecting, the Sub-Committee agreed that there were areas, such as those related to contractor performance, that would need to be revisited once this process had been completed.
3. The Sub-Committee identified that capacity remained a key issue for the service and accepted that it would be an ongoing challenge to plan staffing resource for the contract centre and require a higher number of temporary staff to manage demand, until there was greater degree of certainty about the ongoing volume of repairs.
4. The Sub-Committee welcomed confirmation that the number of gas safety checks completed had significantly improved, although it agreed to continue to monitor performance in this area while it remained below the key performance indicator target.

Recommendations

Following its discussion of this item the Sub-Committee agreed to submit the following recommendations for the consideration of the Executive Mayor -

1. The Homes Sub-Committee recommends that the Council’s reporting on void turnaround times is brought into line with other local authorities and rather than using one overall figure for all voids, these are split to differentiate between the turnaround time for lettable voids and major voids.
2. The Homes Sub-Committee recommends that as part of the work to heat map repairs, that any homes with no repairs recorded for a significant period are also reviewed to understand why this may be the case, to ensure there are no unreported repairs that may cause more serious property damage if left unaddressed.