Caretaking

1
Housing Scrutiny

• Caretaking
• Presentation - Meric Apak
• September 2007

2
Research
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007

• Camden - Survey results of residents in Artisan
  Dwellings (2004)
• Artisan Dwellings TRA - Residents Survey results
  (2006)
• Straw poling of Caretakers perceptions (2007)
• Monitoring systems in place
• Summary

3
Conflict Resolution Toolkit developed by
Compas_at_TPAS in association with the Housing
Ombudsman Service and the Housing Corporation
(Extract)
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007
It's important to note that although both Camden
and council tenants want the same outcome, they
approach this from their differing perspectives
provider and receiver. It is this dynamic that
makes resident involvement such an essential
business activity. Without both perspectives
there is always only half a story.
4
Council door knocking exercise April 2004
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007
A Yes 46 B No 50 Sometimes 4
Are you happy with the standard of caretaking?
Those answering NO made the following comments 7
residents complained that the communal floors
werent cleaned properly and of those two
residents said that the caretakers only clean the
ground floor. 2 residents noted the problems with
rough sleepers and drug takers cause e.g.
urinating in the lifts.
5
Observations of staff carrying out the survey.
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007

• Ray Allard, Area Manager, South Team, Kentish
  Town DHO.
• I was very surprised by the comments I have heard
  about the standard of caretaking in these blocks,
  having just visited every block and going on to
  every floor I can say I can see nothing wrong
  with the standard of caretaking. I must say the
  whole estate looked clean and tidy. If I were to
  express any concern it would be about the large
  number of bicycles and other furniture that seems
  to be stored on the landings. However, this is
  not something that falls under the control of
  caretakers.
• Mandy Berger, Estate Officer, South Team, Kentish
  Town DHO.
• I was very impressed by the cleanliness of the
  blocks. I recognise that the floor coverings can
  look marked even if they have just been washed so
  this may look like the work is not being done
  when in fact it actually is. The lifts were very
  clean and did not smell either. I agree about the
  number of items left on the landings. These
  should be cleared by their owners.
• Natasha Dickinson, Deputy Area Manager, South
  Team, Kentish Town DHO.
• On the whole I thought the blocks were in a very
  good and clean condition all paintwork and walls
  looked very clean. Some of the upper floors in
  the middle blocks had slightly dusty/grubby
  floors, but some of this could have been down to
  the items, especially bikes, stored in these
  communal halls. Also we saw a tenant using a
  communal hall as a smoking room, (although she
  did use an ashtray). I did wonder if some of the
  residents we questioned had unrealistic
  expectations of the service we provide, and
  others complained about drug users/vagrants using
  the blocks at night and leaving a mess. This is
  obviously not the fault of the caretaking
  service, but a wider problem, as long as any mess
  is cleared/cleaned in the next working day.
• Matthew Shaw, Project Officer, Kentish Town DHO.
• I was impressed with the cleanliness of the
  blocks in Royal College Street. I did note that
  some of the residents that were questioned
  referred to rough sleepers causing a number of
  problems (e.g. urinating in the lifts, sleeping
  in communal areas). Obviously this would have an
  impact on the amount of caretaking required to
  bring the cleanliness of the block up to an
  acceptable standard. I also noted that there were
  a number of bicycles being stored in communal
  areas. On one landing there were four bicycles
  and given the recent amount of rainfall this
  would also have an affect on the amount of
  caretaking required.

6
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007
Artisan Dwellings TRA (September 06) Residents
questionnairePlease rate the following council
services
7
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007
Artisan Dwellings TRA (September 06) Residents
surveyPlease rate the following council services
8
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007
Artisan Dwellings TRA (September 06) Residents
surveyPlease rate the following council services
9
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007
Artisan Dwellings TRA (September 06) Residents
surveyPlease rate the following council services
10
Caretakers SurveyJanuary March 2007 I
undertook a questionnaire for caretakers. I
wanted to find out if they had any contributions
to make for perceptions of tenants in general,
about allegations of poor caretaking
services.Under a promise of anonymity I managed
to interview 13 caretakers.
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007
11
Summary of Caretakers Survey
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007

• Demoralisation due to staff shortages and
  unrealistic expectations
• Inadequate/inappropriate supervision/monitoring
  protocols
• Tenants are mislead by bureaucracy, therefore
  their expectations of the service is unrealistic
• Lack of effective and transparent involvement of
  all partners
• Some districts deal with these issues and the
  resulting stresses in different ways, resulting
  in better outcomes then others.
• This fragmented approach results in inconsistent
  service delivery and differing levels of quality.
  

12
In more detail
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007

• Demoralisation
• Holiday and sickness inadequate cover.
• Being shifted from estate to estate.
• Expectations beyond the call of duty (clearing up
  drugs paraphernalia and bodily fluids).
• Inadequate equipment to do the work.

13
In more detail
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007
Monitoring / Supervision 1) Desired
Cleanliness 2) Attainable Cleanliness 3)
Attainable 100 4) 75 is acceptable
14
In more detail
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007

• DMCs, DMPs, the Executive, and this very
  committee, has received reports from HASC,
  claiming that Caretaking continues to be a high
  quality service.
• How is it then that not all residents would agree
  with this statement?
• How is it that HASCs bench mark of 75
  satisfactory threshold is not believed by
  residents?
• What if that 75 could in fact be equal to 47?

15
In more detail
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007
Monitoring / Supervision
1) Desired Cleanliness
16
In more detail
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007
Monitoring / Supervision
1) Desired Cleanliness 2) Attainable Cleanliness
17
In more detail
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007
Monitoring / Supervision
1) Desired Cleanliness 2) Attainable
Cleanliness 3) Attainable 100
18
In more detail
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007
Monitoring / Supervision
1) Desired Cleanliness 2) Attainable
Cleanliness 3) Attainable 100 4) 75 is
acceptable But 75 47 ?
19
What Tenants Suggested !
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007

• A simple tick-box check list similar to those
  used in Motorway Stations.
• This has been rejected by the Portfolio Group as
  not practical or suitable for this application.
  
• Why then is it suitable for the sixth floor in
  Bidborough House?
• When asked as to no tenant involvement in the set
  up or participation in the Portfolio Group, the
  same reason was given!

20
Caretaking presentation to Housing Scrutiny
Committee September 2007
At Artisan Dwellings we have now resorted to seek
a resolution to our Caretaking issues through
setting a Local Compact
I cant help feeling that unless the defensive
attitudes on both sides give way to taking a leap
of faith to understand each others perspectives,
and accepting them, and without a directive from
senior management to have an open mind about
exploring different and effective monitoring
systems for cleaning, the deadlock would continue
and it is highly likely that there will be no
agreed resolution to this issue.