ao link
Twitter
Facebook
Linked In
Twitter
Facebook
Linked In

You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles

Regulator issues six governance upgrades to housing associations

Six housing associations have seen their ratings for governance upgraded by the Regulator of Social Housing.

Linked InTwitterFacebookeCard
Picture: Getty
Picture: Getty
Sharelines

Six housing associations have seen their ratings for governance upgraded by the Regulator of Social Housing #ukhousing

In a slew of regulatory judgements, the regulator upgraded the governance ratings of Broadacres, Islington and Shoreditch Housing Association (ISHA), Manningham, Saffron Housing Trust, Severn Vale Housing Society and Tower Hamlets Community Housing (THCH).

However, four of these still have to improve some areas of their governance arrangements. Saffron Housing Trust, Broadacres, THCH and Manningham are rated G2, meaning they are compliant with the regulator’s standards but must improve certain aspects.

Meanwhile, the regulator put Ongo Homes on its grading under review list, meaning it is currently investigating whether the North Lincolnshire-based housing association has breached any of its standards.

It gave no details on why 10,000-home Ongo was being added to the list other than clarifying that it is specifically concerned about governance issues.

Matthew Spittles, chair of Ongo, told Inside Housing: “The review has been initiated following the voluntary referral of information from the Ongo Homes’ board to the regulator.”

In January, Ongo appointed a new chief executive, Steve Hepworth, after Andy Orrey retired following 10 years at the organisation.


READ MORE

Association judged non-compliantAssociation judged non-compliant
Association non-compliant after building company strugglesAssociation non-compliant after building company struggles
Chief executive resigns following board failuresChief executive resigns following board failures

South Norfolk Council’s stock transfer association Saffron Housing Trust was upgraded for governance from G3 to G2.

Saffron was originally declared non-compliant in October 2016, when chief executive Adam Ronaldson and director of housing and finance Stephen Flowitt-Hill both resigned over failing to appoint board members properly.

At the time, the regulator criticised 6,000-home Saffron for keeping its problems quiet since 2011, only informing the regulator in June 2016.

In January this year, Saffron’s board was criticised by the regulator for failing to demonstrate “an effective approach to reporting, quantification and management of key risks” and had its rating kept at G3.

Today, however, the regulator praised the current board, saying it has “set out a clear vision and purpose for the organisation”.

The regulator also upgraded Broadacres to G2, which was judged non-compliant in February 2017 due to a “serious failure of governance at the most basic level”.

According to the judgement issued then, it had failed to manage “foreseeable risks” in its building company, Mulberry Homes Yorkshire, and was exposed to “material losses, impairment and write-offs”.

Today’s judgement said that 6,300-home Broadacres had worked to reduce its exposure to risks through its subsidiary, which is now wholly owned by the housing association.

Broadacres’ board, the regulator said, now has greater oversight of Mulberry Homes Yorkshire’s activities.

Colin Wilkie, chair at Broadacres, said: “We have been liaising closely on an action plan with the regulator since early 2017 and this positive experience has resulted in improvements which have created a new, stronger organisation that is fit for the future.

“This includes the recent launch of our new corporate strategy which sets out Broadacres’ commitment to building 1,250 new homes over the next five years, 90% of which will be affordable, in addition to significant investment in our existing homes and with a particular emphasis on environmental performance to tackle fuel poverty in rural areas.”

THCH also saw its governance rating improve from G3 to G2 after it worked on various issues where it had previously been criticised by the regulator.

In 2016, the regulator judged that 3,000-home THCH was non-compliant with its governance standard as a result of issues around site acquisition, procurement and delivery of two significant development schemes.

It also criticised the association’s approach to health and safety at the time, noting that there were “a number of very high risk outstanding actions arising from fire risk assessments”.

In today’s judgement, however, the regulator said that THCH had hired new executives and board members, strengthening its team and has “delivered a cultural change and restructure programme aligned with its purpose and strategic objectives”.

Philip Sullivan, chief executive of THCH, said: “Returning to a compliant governance grading is a significant and positive milestone for THCH after a successful period of restructuring and culture change that has transformed THCH into a hugely different and improved organisation.”

Manningham also saw its rating move from G3 to G2, after it recovered from governance issues identified in February 2017, relating to weaknesses around gas safety.

In today’s judgement, the regulator praised the changes 1,400-home Mannningham has made to its board and executive team.

It said: “An appropriate governance framework is now in place, underpinned by additional leadership and governance resources, and there is evidence of it operating in practice.”

Manningham, which is based in Bradford, also had its rating for financial viability moved up from V2 to V1 thanks to its higher level of fixed debt and ability to deal with interest costs.

Lee Bloomfield, chief executive of Manningham, said: “Registered providers must have the confidence of the regulator and our funders. Being downgraded to non-compliant puts a cloud over this. I am delighted that the brave and ambitious changes we have made over the last two years have been acknowledged.”

These four housing associations, according to the regulator, still have to let their planned changes take effect and progress along their strategies in order to return to G1 ratings.

Severn Vale Housing Society which is in the middle of a merger with Bromford, has moved up to a G1 rating.

Tim Knight, chief executive of Severn Vale, said: “We are absolutely delighted that the regulator has recognised the improved governance capability within Severn Vale, a key part of which was to appoint a Board based on skillsets we required to run our business as opposed to outdated criteria that required applicants to be representative of specific categories of stakeholders.”

So too has ISHA, which improved areas around health and safety compliance in order to return to the top rating for governance.

ISHA was, however, downgraded over financial viability, moving from V1 to V2. The regulator does not require ISHA to improve its viability, though.

According to the regulator, this downgrade was the result of ISHA increasing its spending on major repairs. This has made it harder for the association to afford interest payments on its debt.

Stephen Stringer, chair of ISHA’s board, said: “We are really pleased that we have been regraded to G1, which reflects all the hard work of the Board and staff at ISHA. We are reassured that the regrade to V2 is a compliant grade and the Regulator is supportive of the investment we have planned for our existing homes.”

Update: at 10.55 on 19.12.18 This story was updated to include a comment from Mr Bloomfield.

Update: at 11.30 on 19.12.18 This story was updated to include a comment from Mr Knight.

Update: at 11.44 on 19.12.18 This story was updated to clarify that Severn Vale now has a G1 rating.

Update: at 12.35 on 19.12.18 This story was updated to include a comment from Mr Stringer.

Update: at 09.30 on 20.12.18 The table below this story was updated to confirm that Broadacres Housing Association was given a viability upgrade

Regulatory judgements published on 19 December 2018

ProviderGovernanceViabilityExplanation
Advance Housing and SupportG2V1No change
Black Country Housing GroupG1V1No change
Bournville Village TrustG2V1No change
BPHAG1V1No change
Broadacres Housing AssociationG2V1Governance and viability upgrade
Catalyst HousingG1V1No change
Clarion Housing GroupG1V1No change
Cross Keys HomesG1V1No change
Gloucester City HomesG1V2No change
Golding HomesG1V1No change
Hexagon Housing AssociationG1V1No change
Hightown Housing AssociationG1V1No change
Irwell Valley Housing AssociationG1V1No change
Islington and Shoreditch Housing AssociationG1V2Governance upgrade and viability downgrade
Johnnie Johnson Housing TrustG1V1No change
Manningham Housing AssociationG2V1Governance and viability upgrades
Mount Green Housing AssociationG1V2No change
Ongo HomesG1V1Grading under review
Phoenix Community Housing Association (Bellingham and Downham)G1V1No change
Progress Housing GroupG1V1No change
Radian GroupG2V1No change
Riverside Group (The)G1V1No change
Rochdale Boroughwide HousingG1V2No change
Saffron Housing TrustG2V1Governance upgrade
Severn Vale Housing SocietyG1V2Governance upgrade
Stafford & Rural HomesG1V1No change
Staffordshire Housing AssociationG1V1No change
Swan Housing AssociationG1V2No change
Together Housing GroupG1V1No change
Tower Hamlets Community HousingG2V2Governance upgrade
Town and Country Housing GroupG1V1No change
Victory Housing TrustG1V1No change
Wakefield And District HousingG1V1No change
Warrington Housing AssociationG1V1No change
Westward Housing GroupG1V1No change
Wrekin Housing Group (The)G1V2No change
Wythenshawe Community Housing GroupG1V1No change
Your Housing GroupG1V1No change

Regulatory judgements in England explained

The Regulator of Social Housing publishes regulatory judgements for all providers owning 1,000 or more social housing homes.

These judgements set out whether the provider is complying with the regulator’s governance and financial viability standards.

The regulator carries out an assessment either through a scheduled in-depth assessment, or reactive engagement (in which the regulator acts following information about a provider).

It then awards the provider a rating from one to four for financial viability (V) and a separate rating from one to four for governance (G).

Providers must score two or higher in both categories to be judged as complying with the standards.

As providers have increasingly taken on more risk to cross-subsidise social and affordable housing delivery through market-facing activity, the regulator has changed a number of associations’ viability ratings from V1 to V2.

The regulator often categorises this kind of regulatory action as ‘regrades’ rather than downgrades. Click here to read more.

 

Key to ratings:

V1/G1: Compliant

V2/G2: Compliant

V3/G3: Non-compliant and intensive regulatory engagement needed

V4/G4: Non-complaint, serious failures, leading to either intensive regulatory engagement or the use of enforcement powers

 

Rating straplines in full:

Governance ratings:

G1: The provider meets our governance requirements.

G2: The provider meets our governance requirements but needs to improve some aspects of its governance arrangements to support continued compliance.

G3: The provider does not meet our governance requirements. There are issues of serious regulatory concern and in agreement with us the provider is working to improve its position.

G4: The provider does not meet our governance requirements. There are issues of serious regulatory concern and the provider is subject to regulatory intervention or enforcement action.

 

Financial viability ratings:

V1: The provider meets our viability requirements and has the financial capacity to deal with a wide range of adverse scenarios.

V2: The provider meets our viability requirements. It has the financial capacity to deal with a reasonable range of adverse scenarios but needs to manage material risks to ensure continued compliance.

V3: The provider does not meet our viability requirements. There are issues of serious regulatory concern and, in agreement with us, the provider is working to improve its position.

V4: The provider does not meet our viability requirements. There are issues of serious regulatory concern and the provider is subject to regulatory intervention or enforcement action.

Jargon-busting: some regulatory terms and what they mean

Jargon-busting: some regulatory terms and what they mean
  • Co-regulation: this means boards are responsible for deciding how to meet the regulator’s standards – the regulator does not prescribe how to do this
  • Gradings under review list: a public list of providers under investigation who are at risk of being judged non-compliant with regulatory standards
  • In-depth assessment: a planned inspection, in which the regulator assesses a providers viability, governance and approach to value for money
  • Narrative regulatory judgement: a detailed explanation of the reasons behind a regulatory judgement. Narrative judgements are published where a providers’ viability or governance ratings have changed, or where RSH has particular issues or concerns.
  • Reactive engagement: refers to the regulator reacting to complaints or allegations about a provider and taking action
  • Stability check: an annual assessment of all providers owning 1,000 social homes or more. RSH uses accounts and statistical return data to check for any changes in a providers’ risk profile.
  • Strapline regulatory judgement: where a provider is meeting the standards, and its governance or viability ratings have not changed since its previous judgement, the regulator does not publish a full judgement explaining its reasons for the gradings. Instead it just publishes the gradings themselves, in a ‘strapline’.

 

Regulatory judgements published on 28 November 2018

ProviderGovernanceViabilityExplanation
Accord Housing AssociationG1V1No change
Arawak Walton Housing AssociationG1V1No change
Aspire HousingG1V1No change
Beyond HousingG2V1Merger - first judgement
Beyond HousingG2V1Consumer Standards
Cambridge Housing SocietyG1V2No change
Chelmer Housing PartnershipG1V1No change
Connect Housing AssociationG1V1No change
Connexus HousingG2V2Governance downgrade
County Durham Housing GroupG1V2No change
Croydon Churches Housing AssociationG1V1No change
East Midlands Housing GroupG1V1No change
Empowering People Inspiring CommunitiesG2V1No change
Flagship Housing GroupG1V1No change
Futures Housing GroupG1V1No change
Golden Lane Housing LtdG1V1No change
Grand Union Housing GroupG1V1No change
Housing Plus GroupG1V1No change
Hyde Housing AssociationG1V2Changed basis for viability grade
Inquilab Housing AssociationG1V1No change
Joseph Rowntree Housing TrustG2V2No change
Kinsman HousingN/AN/AConsumer and Economic Standards
Local SpaceG1V1No change
London & Quadrant Housing TrustG1V1No change
Longhurst GroupG1V1No change
Magna HousingG1V1No change
Midland HeartG1V1No change
Muir Group Housing AssociationG1V1No change
Nottingham Community Housing AssociationG1V1No change
Octavia HousingG1V1No change
One ManchesterG1V1No change
One Vision HousingG1V1No change
Platform Housing GroupG1V1Merger - first judgement
Raven Housing TrustG1V1No change
Selwood Housing SocietyG1V1No change
Silva HomesG1V1No change
Sovereign Housing AssociationG1V1No change
StonewaterG1V1No change
Teign HousingG1V1Governance upgrade
Trafford Housing TrustG1V1No change
Trident Housing AssociationG1V1No change
United CommunitiesG1V1No change
Watford Community Housing TrustG1V1No change
Weaver Vale Housing TrustG1V1No change
Wellingborough HomesG1V1No change
Worthing HomesG1V1No change
Yarlington Housing GroupG1V1No change
Linked InTwitterFacebookeCard
Add New Comment
You must be logged in to comment.
By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to the use of cookies. Browsing is anonymised until you sign up. Click for more info.
Cookie Settings