Matt Alexander (Housing Operations Manager) to deliver presentation with contract manager and contactor (Ian Williams).
Minutes:
The Chair urged attendees to keep their questions as general as possible. William
Jones, representing Ian Williams, the Council’s Responsive Repairs and Voids
Contractor, then presented an overview of the last five months of their business
operations.
William Jones noted the performance record since he entered the role in June. He
mentioned the average monthly volume of reactive orders (around 1,100 to 1,200)
and the significance of maintaining a two-and-a-half-week work-in-progress (WIP).
He displayed a graph indicating a decline in live orders from 1,200 in April to
approximately 650 by the end of August. He emphasised that this change marked a
positive impact from the steps and measures they had implemented, even though
they hadn't reached their ideal state. He also noted improvements in emergency
and urgent performance, aiming for 90% completion on routine jobs in the next
quarter.
William outlined the changes made, including restructuring the operational
management, dividing the workforce for efficiency, conducting performance
reviews, recruitment efforts, and optimizing the supply chain.
Graphs in his presentation showed performance metrics for emergency, urgent, and
routine tasks. The performance in April and May was not optimistic. However, since
June, performance began to improve, and by August, the emergency and urgent
tasks had reached their desired performance levels. They aimed to continue
improving routine performance to reach their target of 95%.
William elaborated on the changes made:
1. They reviewed their operational management structure to provide more clarity in
roles and responsibilities.
2. The workforce was split into fast response jobs for emergencies and larger works
that required pre-site planning and specific delivery schedules.
3. A performance review was conducted with direct labour, leading to the departure
of five employees who weren't meeting performance standards. Simultaneously,
seven new employees were recruited with specific skill sets, and resources were
brought in-house for areas like electrical work and flooring.
4. Recruitment efforts were ongoing with more robust recruitment criteria, as it was
essential to maintain a talented workforce.
5. The supply chain underwent changes to ensure alignment with their performance
goals. They transitioned out underperforming contractors and introduced new
contractors, even though this was an ongoing process.
6. Their goal was to decrease outsourcing to about 20%, focusing on specialist
tasks like drainage, large roofing jobs, and flooring.
William Jones continued his presentation, highlighting various changes made, such
as restructured management and the division of the workforce to address
emergencies and larger projects. The company also performed performance
reviews for direct labour, recruiting new talent, and optimizing the supply chain by
transitioning away from underperforming contractors. Their goal is to reduce
outsourcing to 20% of work, focusing on specialist tasks like drainage and large
roofing jobs.
There were several questions raised about the presentation;
1. Terry Daubney, Waverley Tenant’s Panel, highlighted his disappointment
with the service; most significantly that tenant satisfaction was continuing to
drop and that missed appointments, delays and failure to communicate by
Ian Williams set a poor standard for social housing in the Tenants’
perspective. He highlighted that Ian Williams had promised to carry out
tenant meetings across the borough on a regular basis; he is not aware that
any such meetings had been carried out. He requested that the Waverley
Tenant’s Panel are involved in these meetings as tenant involvement is
crucial.
2. Cllr Keen expressed her disappointment, particularly with delays,
communication issues and missed appointments. She emphasised that
respect for tenants should be at the heart of the service and noted the case
of two tenants in her ward, who had complained regarding missed cooker
and toiler repairs. William expressed his understanding and offered to
discuss the specific cases in detail outside of the meeting.
3. Danielle Sleightholme, Waverley Tenant’s Panel Co-optee, queried whether
the Council should carry out a review of the systems in place to look at what
has gone wrong and lessons learned as well as improvements that can be
made. Matt Alexander, Housing Operations Manager, confirmed that officers
were in the process of setting this up and were looking at resourcing this. He
confirmed that Tenant’s Panel involvement would be ensured.
4. Chris Austin, Lucas Field’s Residents Group, stressed the importance of
optimizing communication by keeping the Council in the communication loop
between tenants and Ian Williams.
Annalisa Howson, Service Improvements Manager, addressed the Board and noted
that the KPI information from the Q1 report was based on performance in April, May
and June. Therefore, when we get the same statistics back by the end of Autumn,
we will be able to see an improvement in the service as the impact of changes in
the service will start to become apparent.