Inspectors deliver positive verdicts
Audit Commission inspectors have delivered generally positive verdicts in a bumper crop of nine reports published this week.
The inspections looked at a range of services from different types of provider, including housing associations, councils and arm’s-length management organisations:
- Derby-based Derwent Living’s repairs service was rated as having ‘a balance of strengths and weaknesses’, following a short notice inspection looking at repairs and gas servicing.
- Eden Housing Association ‘has more strengths than weaknesses’ according to a report looking at day-to-day repairs and the management of empty properties at the Penrith-based landlord.
- Salford ALMO Salix Homes provides a ‘good’ service with ‘excellent’ prospects for improvement, and received a two-star rating.
- Bradford housing association Incommunities has more strengths than weakness and is making steady improvements in its repairs, empty properties and gas servicing work.
- London-based association Peabody has ‘made significant progress in the way that it involves its residents in shaping services’ according to a short notice inspection looking at this area, gas safety, and repairs. Inspectors said there is a need for ‘significant improvement’ in its responsive repairs service.
- Inspectors found William Sutton Homes has ‘more strengths than weaknesses’ after inspecting its repairs and gas servicing work, and how well it involves tenants in managing and improving services.
- South Liverpool Housing Group has ‘more strengths than weaknesses’, according to an inspection looking at repairs, gas servicing, and rent arrears.
- Watford Community Housing Trust received one star from inspectors, who said it provides a ‘fair’ service with ‘excellent prospects for improvement’.
- South Kesteven District Council provides a ‘fair’ housing service and received one star. This is a significant improvement on a 2008 report, which rated the council services as ‘poor’ with ‘uncertain’ prospects.
Full details of all the reports can be seen on the Audit Commission website.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (6)
the purple avenger | 25/03/2010 11:29 am
Given the introduction of standards - which dont align to current KLOEs - who cares? A lot of work and distraction for a positive judgement which means very little. What a waste of resource and effort. The sooner the Audit Commission is scaled down to focus on just significant problems rather than this cyclical poking around the better.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
LA | 25/03/2010 1:15 pm
Purple Avenger
Inspections are risk assessed - not cyclical.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
worried well | 25/03/2010 2:22 pm
If the Audit Commission do not know what they are looking at, then they are merely guessing what they think the risks are and where it lies. The truth is that the risk lies in following their inspection and control thinking and focus. Checklists, Kloes and all of that junk. Stafford hospital had a good rating and the Baby P service was actually recorded as being good.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
the purple avenger | 25/03/2010 2:56 pm
That is the spin given to us - but can you ascertain exactly what the Audit Commission's risk assessment is based upon? They are known to swoop into a subsidiary for no apparent reason - and when asked why they wont say. Let us hope the TSA's recent announcement stating that they will consult on a risk framework will provide some clarity on how you appear on their radar - and also lets hope that they will keep their promise of advising 'lucky' recipients as to the reason they are being inspected.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
La | 26/03/2010 8:42 am
The TSA tells the Audit Commission which associations to inspect - its their risk assessment.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
worried well | 26/03/2010 10:08 am
Its all a rather pointless exercise if the AC do not know what they are looking at and all they do is apply all of the junk in their heads and written down on their little Kloe tick-boxes. It doesn't leave behind good organizations. It just creates organizations that look like their tick-boxes. The presumption is that the AC know what they are doing. But it has to be realised that the audit commission is just trying to keep themselves in jobs and at the centre of discussion and power. They cannot admit that their approach has not worked because this calls into question their purpose.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment