SMALL SCALE COMMUNITY LED HOUSING - Community Led Organisations Leading the Way Understanding the Potential of - Locality
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Understanding the Potential of SMALL SCALE COMMUNITY LED HOUSING Community Led Organisations Leading the Way Jo Gooding Tom Johnston July 2015
Small Scale Community Led Housing ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to express our utmost thanks to those who gave their time to be interviewed. In particular, we would like to recognise the time given freely by:- • Back on the Map (Sunderland) • Bristol Charities • Giroscope (Hull) • Glendale Gateway Trust (Northumberland) • LATCH (Leeds) • Pembroke Estate TMO (Plymouth) • St Minver CLT (Cornwall) • Starley Housing Cooperative (Coventry) • Stonesfield (Oxon) • Witton Lodge Community Association (Birmingham) The report was commissioned and funded by Locality and the Federation of Northumberland Development Trusts. PAGE2
Small Scale Community Led Housing REPORT CONTENTS 1 Report Summary 4 2 Introduction 7 3 Objectives of the Report and Research 9 4 Research Methodology 11 5 An Overview of the Community Led Housing Sector 15 6 Small Scale Community Owned & Managed Housing – a Viable Proposition 21 7 Case Studies Overview 25 8 Case Study Evidence 37 9 Case Study Strategies for Alleviating Problems 48 10 Looking Forward – Supporting Future Development 57 11 Recommendations 59 Appendix 1 – Benefits of Community Housing Appendix 2 – An Introduction to Community Led Housing Models Appendix 3 – Comparative Table Showing Strengths & Linkages Appendix 4 – Case Study Prompt Sheet (used in interviews) References PAGE3
Small Scale Community Led Housing
1
REPORT SUMMARY
1.1 Introduction & Objectives of 1.2 Methodology
the Report Desktop research helped to provide a
Housing - and the provision of housing - better understanding of the sector as a
is a key issue facing the nation. There is whole, however, there proved to be little
nothing new about community led robust data publicly available. Two key
housing; Almshouses, Housing Co- data sets were the Charities Commission
operatives and charitable trusts have been and Homes and Communities Agency.
delivering housing that meets local needs Criteria were then set for the selection of
for many years. Community ownership case studies; those chosen represent a
has the potential to empower wide cross-section of different models
communities and to deliver projects that and location types, where organisations
people care about, and that support the own, manage or develop less than 250
wider regeneration of an area. The housing units.
objective of this report is to examine the
community led housing sector and to
draw out examples of how community led 1.3 Overview of the community
housing projects operate as sustainable led housing sector
forms of social and community enterprise. The term ‘community led housing’ is
It is hoped that, by presenting this commonly used to describe homes that
evidence, other new community housing are developed and/or managed by local
projects, and their enabling partners, will people or residents, in not for profit
have the confidence to deliver new organisational structures. There are a
community led housing solutions tailored range of models that can be adopted
to their own communities. including self-help housing, Cohousing,
co-operatives and tenant controlled
housing, Community Land Trusts (CLTs)
PAGE4
Small Scale Community Led Housing
and Development Trusts. Research a variety of contexts; urban, rural, small,
unveiled that the community led housing large. The qualifying characteristic is that
sector was bigger than anticipated with the homes are managed by a majority of
charities, Almshouses, Registered either residents or those who live and
Providers, Tenant Management work in the area. The research also shows
Organisations (TMOs), Housing that ownership of the housing asset is
Co-operatives, Self Help Housing paramount from a business model
Organisations, Development Trusts, perspective, enabling the community not
Community Land Trusts (CLTs) and for profit housing provider to raise
Cohousing Communities all operating investment, manage quality outcomes
community led housing projects. and tenancy allocation. It creates the
sense of ownership and value that in turn
is empowering and creates a stable
1.4 Case studies revenue income to underpin further
The case studies examined through this investment and organisational stability.
research (and listed below) showcase a
We found that management costs were
range of different models and include
not extensive and that there were many
urban and rural settings. Most projects let
examples of organisations operating
their homes at affordable or social rents.
profitably. We also found that housing
• Back on the Map (Sunderland) management issues were readily solved
• Bristol Charities within the resources that these small
organisations can command. This is
• Giroscope (Hull) contrary to the warnings that are often
• Glendale Gateway Trust laboured by partnering housing
(Northumberland) associations and local authorities seeking
to warn small potential community
• LATCH (Leeds)
providers of difficulties that will require
• Pembroke Estate TMO (Plymouth) the intervention of larger organisations
• St Minver CLT (Cornwall) with capacity and experience. This is
clearly not necessarily the case showing
• Starley Housing Cooperative
that local management can be cost
(Coventry)
effective and responsive to tenancy issues
• Stonesfield (Oxon) as they arise. Too much of the narrative
• Witton Lodge Community Association about community led initiatives focuses
(Birmingham) on the development of projects; there is
insufficient attention given to learning
The research undertaken demonstrates from existing practice and awareness of
that small scale community led housing is the capabilities and needs of these
a sustainable business practice. It has organisations to help others to replicate
shown that community led housing their successes.
models are deliverable at all scales and in
PAGE5
Small Scale Community Led Housing
1.5 Recommendations
A set of key recommendations has term dedicated funding, as well as
resulted from the development of this recognition of the multiple social,
report. Recommendations include environmental and economic benefits of
challenging the myth that bigger is better small scale community led housing. The
with regard to the development of detailed set of recommendations is shown
community led housing, calling for a in Section 10.
more robust comprehensive data set on
Small scale community led housing will
the sector and further research to be
not replace mainstream housing
undertaken on community housing
provision, but it can trailblaze and it can
management practices. The report also
provide the inspiration for how housing
recommends that the sector would
could be provided.
benefit from more of an holistic approach
to community led housing policy, long
“Small scale community led housing will not replace
mainstream housing provision, but it can trailblaze
and it can provide the inspiration for how housing
could be provided. ”
PAGE6
Small Scale Community Led Housing
2
INTRODUCTION
One of the biggest issues facing the nation is housing. Over the past
30 years, housing has become a commodity and a measure of the
nation’s wealth. Successive governments have intervened with short
term piecemeal programmes to increase supply and make planning
system reforms; efforts that have periodically (artificially) stimulated
the market, but the failure to provide housing to meet need has
resulted in overinflated house prices.
As a consequence of such a long-term many of whom have thrived on the
failed approach, the private rental market transfer of council owned housing stock
has expanded, and many communities and the generous government subsidies
across the UK are faced with situations offered through the former Housing
whereby young people and those of Corporation (now the Homes and
limited means are unable to afford to buy Communities Agency). Things have
their own home, or pay the rents, or changed. For many, the ‘fewer, bigger,
accept the terms, of private landlords. better’ approach instigated by the best
value regime in the 2000s and reinforced
The provision of social rented and other
by the 2004 Gershon Review of Public
types of affordable housing has largely
Sector Efficiency1 has distanced housing
been filled by registered housing
from local management and local need,
providers, mainly housing associations,
and as a result, more and more
1
The Gershon Efficiency Review was a review of efficiency in the UK public sector conducted in 2004-5 by Sir Peter Gershon
PAGE7
Small Scale Community Led Housing
community led organisations have sought the provisions created in the Localism Act
to address emerging housing issues in 2011 are designed to facilitate and
their own communities. In many, if not resource adequately community driven
most, of the examples we are showcasing asset development projects is hotly
in this report, developing and managing contested. However, by establishing
community led housing has proven not access to revenue funding (Community
only valuable in terms of providing a Led Project Support Fund) and access to
much needed and valued service, but also capital through Community Empty Homes
in demonstrating that affordable housing Grant and the Community Affordable
can be a sustainable social enterprise Home Programme, actions have helped to
which enables and supports much wider normalise and counteract the prevailing
community regeneration. narrative of previous political
administrations that housing should only
There is nothing new about community
be provided by large organisations. In
led housing – Almshouses have been in
recent times Localism support measures
existence for centuries, Housing Co-
have avoided prescriptive approaches to
operatives and charitable trusts have been
favouring different community housing
operating for decades, quietly delivering
models, however the design of
real value in communities; owning and
programme funding for the Community
managing housing in a way that connects
Right to Build is viewed by some as not fit
people with the communities they live in.
for purpose under scrutiny, that simpler
Community ownership has the potential
revenue/capital funding could enable and
to empower, rejuvenate and invest in
increase the delivery of community
people, to deliver projects people care
housing programmes and that this should
about, to retain investment in areas
be made more widely available (CLG
experiencing uplift and to create sustained
Select Committee 2015 on Community
benefits. This process has been initiated
Rights). Community animators should be
successfully in many places the world
aware of capitalising on the opportunities
over, the real challenge is identifying the
presented by public sector withdrawal,
vital elements of success.
and the consequential availability of
The coalition Government (2010- 2015) redundant assets. They should be very
has built on previous measures such as mindful of avoiding taking on assets that
the Quirk Review (2007) into community are no longer viable especially in the
ownership of public assets by calling on absence of dowry payments from public
communities to deliver self-help projects authorities in recognition of sometimes
to provide welfare and social facilities, poor management over many years.
including small scale community housing
(Moore & McKee, 2013). The extent that
PAGE8
Small Scale Community Led Housing 3 OBJECTIVES OF THE REPORT AND RESEARCH The aim of this research and report is to seek to understand the size of the community led housing sector and to examine the different business approaches of a varied selection of case studies to determine the notion of community led housing as a viable form of social and community enterprise. PAGE9
Small Scale Community Led Housing
We know from years of delivering and The report is not a ‘how to develop a
supporting the development of community housing project’ guide, and
community led housing projects that shouldn’t be considered as such. The
there are sustainable business models, but intention is to inform the reader about
have found the lack of available how successful projects have approached
information to be a barrier in convincing developing and managing a successful
others that this is the case. The lack of community housing portfolio.
information is compounded by a
Above all, we hope this report will raise
common myth that the development and
the confidence of people developing new
management of housing is too difficult to
community housing projects, and their
finance and manage. This report evaluates
enabling partners, by providing evidence
some of the critical issues such as;
of the scale and viability of different
• how established organisations finance approaches and the extended benefits -
the management and maintenance of tailored to address local issues- that can
properties be achieved through local small scale
delivery. For a full list of the benefits of
• how they manage risks and bad debt
community led housing see Appendix 1.
• why established community housing
organisations started out
• who is housed and the different
property allocation processes adopted
“We hope this report will raise the confidence of
people developing new community housing
projects”
PAGE10Small Scale Community Led Housing 4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Our starting point involved detailed desktop research to try and understand the sector better, and to map out the range of organisations out there, and numbers of organisations involved. 4.1 Research process Ideally, we would like to have been able to records numbers of registered charities access more detailed information to with housing interests and does not better understand the average size of provide secondary data for interrogation. property portfolios, value of stock, This is a key gap in available data. We geographical locations and financial data, attempted random analysis of however, there was very little robust data organisations listed and found several of this type collated and made available. previously unidentified organisations Two important data sets were the providing and managing housing, Charities Commission and the national alongside examples of organisations housing agency - the Homes and providing advocacy and supported Communities Agency (HCA). The HCA has housing services. The scope of this study a searchable database of limited data did not permit a full interrogation; we fields; names, number of homes hope that this could form part of a new managed, location, how homes are research enquiry. managed. The Charity Commission only PAGE11
Small Scale Community Led Housing
Establishing how many Charitable Trusts owning and managing between 6 and 203
registered with The Charity Commission homes, 79 are Almshouse organisations
were managing and developing owning and managing between 2 and 212
community led housing proved a homes and 84 are Co-operative societies
surprisingly difficult task. The Charity owning and managing between 3 and 162
Commission website includes a detailed homes.
search engine which we hoped to use to
The next stage of the research was sifting
arrive at an accurate number. There are
through the many organisations identified
164,000 charities on the register, and
to find examples, which fulfilled the
various criteria that can be used to search
necessary criteria. This involved direct
in more detail. After much deliberation
discussions, request and receipt of
and discussion with The Charity
newsletters, accounts and annual reports.
Commission, we were advised that the
Both report authors have extensive
most accurate method was to select
knowledge of the sector and as a
category 107 from the search engine drop
consequence, we were mindful of the
down menu – ‘accommodation and
responsibility not to pre-select case
housing’. This identified a total of 1300
studies based on our knowledge of the
charities engaged in this field. We have
relative success and failure of projects.
some doubts as to the accuracy of this
The selection criteria used, prioritised the
number since, in the first instance, the
degree to which projects met the
information largely comes from self-
eligibility criteria (please see below) a
certification, and secondly, that further
consideration of geographical balance
scrutiny reveals that some of these
and a reflection of the different models of
charities exist to support people with
governance in community housing
grants towards housing costs rather than
projects. We hand-picked 10
deliver housing directly.
organisations that represent an interesting
The Homes and Communities Agency cross-section and have taken a detailed
supplied us with their database of national look at what they do, how and why they
Registered Providers (RPs). The database do it, and what others can learn from their
contained 29 different fields of data giving experiences. Selected organisations that
extensive information on whether the RP subsequently agreed to be interviewed
managed supported housing, how many included a range of projects that both
homes were in direct ownership, how researchers of this report did not have in-
many were managed on behalf of other depth awareness of at the outset.
organisations, how many met decent
The third stage involved structured face to
homes standards, etc. Based on the ‘total
face meetings with the selected
low cost rental accommodation owned
organisations, interviews with key staff
and directly managed’ field, we were then
and stakeholders, and collation of material
able to conclude that 120 RPs own less
and reports (see Appendix 4 – Case Study
than 10 homes, 653 own less than 250
Prompt Sheet – used as the basis of
homes and only 60 of the 1387 have more
interviews).
than 10,000 homes. Interestingly, on the
national register of RPs, 29 are YMCAs
PAGE12Small Scale Community Led Housing
We had hoped to complete the work for • Community led – genuine dominant
the Locality convention in November involvement of local residents and or
2014 but were overwhelmed by the lack tenants in the decision making of the
of pre-existing research and information organisation
to support the research objectives. We
• Own/manage less than 250 homes
were also keen to ensure our research
and understanding was as thorough as • Involved in wider regeneration
possible, and that we could maximise the
learning from the experience. • Not for private profit
Due to the developing understanding of • Operating in a defined local
community led housing in the UK, there is geographical location
not a lot of empirical evidence available • Balance of different approaches
concerning the need or viability for including member cooperative
community led housing. As such it is governance and local community
difficult to draw any absolute conclusions. representative management.
Our research demonstrated just how
diverse community led schemes were and • Balance of organisations developing
the different approaches each community new property and renovating empty
had taken. Whilst there is commonality in abandoned homes, urban and rural
that all the schemes had a passion to do and different priorities on who the
more housing, benchmarking seemed housing is provided for.
near impossible given the difficulties in
Because the focus of the research
measuring social, economic and
involved assessing aspects of
environmental benefits resulting from
sustainability, we were concerned to
their direct delivery of community
select case studies that had been
housing.
operating for over five years, to reflect
Our final goal was to capture the learning long term objectives and opportunities.
in a document that could be accessed by We are conscious that developing
as many community led organisations as organisations worry about the formative
possible, and to inform the range of years of a project (financially), as well as
organisations that could support them. the longevity of management
arrangements. In the case studies, we aim
to provide evidence of how these issues
4.2 Criteria for schemes showcased can be addressed successfully.
It was important to us to select case We have been unable to ascertain the
studies which would reflect as diverse a exact number of organisations that have
range of community led development as ceased to operate. We are aware of a
possible, and examples that others could small handful of community providers that
learn from. The criteria we used were as have ceased trading in the last 10 years
follows: but suspect this number could be higher if
a more detailed analysis were undertaken.
Given the minimal level of resources
targeted at this niche sector, the apparent
low failure rate is an achievement in itself.
PAGE13Small Scale Community Led Housing
This is not an academic piece of research, Since the report there have been
and as such, though we are mindful of the significant changes – there was real
limitations of small study sample, we concern that the public spending cuts
make no claim that evidence is introduced by the current government
representative of every community led would lead to a ‘fewer, bigger, better’
housing organisation. approach and the greater powers of the
Scottish Parliament emerging from the
It is of great regret that the limited time
independence referendum has led to
and resources available to do this study,
significant changes such as the abolition
coupled with the fact that the data
of the ‘right to buy’ act in 2014.
available from the Homes and
Communities Agency and the Charities In short, the Scottish social and affordable
Commission do not cover Scotland, and housing provision is evolving and the
that our focus has been entirely on effects of recent legislation will take some
community led housing in England. Given time to be known. However there is
the nature of its geography, rurality and evidence that the Scottish experience of
population density, Scotland has been at community housing has led to
the forefront of community led housing measureable benefits based on a
for many years. Community-Controlled comparative study of outcomes between
Housing Associations (CCHAs) are well residents of community controlled
established and so the principle of smaller housing and other tenure options,
scale housing management is well Satsangi and Murray, ((2011) and cited) in
embedded. A report carried out in 2010 Moore & McKee (2013). It is a
by the University of St Andrews concluded recommendation of this report that
that:- additional resources are found to enable
some in-depth comparisons to be made
between the English and Scottish
CCHAs across Scotland have a strong community led sector with a view to
track record in addressing wider issues establishing what best practice can be
at a neighbourhood level. Their success gleaned from both.
is precisely because of the physical
presence they have at a community
level, and the strong relationships they
have developed with their tenants’
(McKee. 2010). The report goes on to
recognise that the community
regeneration activities fostered through
the CCHAs ‘have immense social and
economic value, but sadly are not
reflected in the Social Housing
Regulator’s measure of ‘value for
tenants and taxpayers’.
PAGE14Small Scale Community Led Housing
5
AN OVERVIEW OF THE
COMMUNITY LED
HOUSING SECTOR
Community is an overused term that can be applied to different
contexts: a ‘community of place’, a ‘community of interest’ are some
of the common uses.
5.1 What do we mean by
community led housing?
‘Community led’ housing is a term Some common features include
commonly used to describe homes that (Gooding, 2013);
are developed and/or managed by local
• Independent not for private profit
people or residents, in not for private
organisation
profit organisational structures.
Organisational structure varies but • Democratic open governance
governance should be overseen by structures, accountable to either the
people who either live or work in the wider community or to direct
locality of benefit, or are direct beneficiaries
beneficiaries. Community housing
generally refers to a small geographic • Predominately ‘affordable housing’ or
identified area of belonging or housing that meets a specific local
association. identified need not being met by other
providers
PAGE15Small Scale Community Led Housing
• Can be new build or renovated achieve. The models have different
properties independent infrastructure support
organisations that are established to
• Can occur in urban and rural situations
champion and assist the development of
• Self-managed for community benefit each approach. This can be hugely
or for member benefit beneficial to new organisations daunted
by the process. The models themselves
There is not a current statutory definition overlap and multiple approaches can be
of ‘community led’ housing; despite the used successfully in one project. It is not a
term being in frequent use by public prerequisite of developing a community
bodies and others. Two community housing project that any model is
housing approaches have UK statutory adopted, though there is a great deal of
definition references and they are, the guidance and peer support to be
Cooperative Housing model in a raft of accessed from the different support
legislation starting with the 1965 Industrial organisations that can act as a catalyst
and Provident Societies Act, and the and give informal access to valuable
Community Land Trust model secured a mentoring support. Models have different
definition in Section 79 of the Housing values and governance emphasis but have
and Regeneration Act 20082. similar main objectives; that of local,
There are different approaches and community ownership and management
models that community led housing of housing for the benefit of the
organisations can adopt to help with the community. It is not the purpose of this
process of developing and managing report to describe in detail each of the
housing. Some models originate from a models or to compare relative merits and
concept and a movement outside of the attributes. However a small table is
UK, others have evolved from organic provided below listing each approach. A
types of organisations that latch onto a fuller description of the varied approaches
model for a supportive framework which is provided in Appendix 2.
resonates with what they are aiming to
2
The definition secured by the Community Land Trust model is as follows:
A corporate body which
• is established for the express purpose of furthering the social, economic and environmental interests of a local
community by acquiring and managing land and other assets in order
o to provide a benefit to the local community;
o to ensure that the assets are not sold or developed except in a manner which the trust's members think benefits
the local community.
• is established under arrangements which are expressly designed to ensure that:
o any profits from its activities will be used to benefit the local community (otherwise than by being paid directly to
members);
o individuals who live or work in the specified area have the opportunity to become members of the trust (whether
or not others can also become members);
o the members of a trust control it.
PAGE16Small Scale Community Led Housing
How many organisations own and
MODELcommunity housing?
manage DESCRIPTION OF THE MODEL
We’re being let down by public services
Self-help
that Housing
only offer Self-Help Housing involves groups of local people
one-size-fits-all solutions.
We deserve better. We should be bringing
treatedempty properties back into residential use.
as people, not numbers. Use of the properties varies from long term tenancies
to short life housing to meet immediate needs such
as move on accommodation and supported housing.
Cohousing Cohousing is a form of intentional, self-managed
community, made up of single private dwellings and
additional shared communal facilities such as a
common house with a community kitchen and
dining room. Cohousing communities can be mixed
tenure.
Cooperative and tenant A Housing Co-op is a housing organisation where
controlled Housing members (tenants) democratically control and
manage their homes. Housing Cooperatives are
autonomous of external organisations. Housing
cooperatives are encouraged to cooperate with
other cooperatives and a key feature is the education
and training of members.
Community Land Trust CLTs are independent local organisations established
(CLTs) to tackle dysfunctional housing market issues and
create permanently affordable intermediate housing
for purchase and for rent. CLTs sometimes own other
facilities on behalf of the community.
Development Trusts, They are community anchor organisations involved
Settlements & Social in a broad spectrum of community projects,
Action Centres charitable assistance, enterprise and community
asset development that span social, economic and
environmental concerns in a local area.
PAGE17Small Scale Community Led Housing
5.2 Origins of the term
‘Community Led Housing’
The term community led housing is a The HCA uses the following legislative
recent policy construct, adopted by position to further assess what constitutes
others, in part, because there hasn’t been a community led housing organisation:-
an independent process to agree what the
collective term for communities owning
‘Established for the express purpose of
and managing housing should be. The
term largely derives from the need to promoting or improving the social,
define which organisations should be economic and environmental well-being
eligible to access Coalition Government of an area that consists of or includes the
(2010-15) capital and revenue neighbourhood area concerned. (Section
programmes to encourage communities 61F(5) of the Town and Country Planning
to develop housing. The main Act 1990, Amendment Localism Act 2011.
organisation responsible for administering
regeneration and housing programmes,
the Homes and Communities Agency,
It is not the purpose of this report to
established the following definition of
describe the origins of this debate and the
what types of models are incorporated
merits of different conceptual arguments.
into their use of the term:-
However, we acknowledge that not
everyone uses or agrees with the
‘A range of models and approaches with description, and that alongside the
varying aims and aspirations. This variations in models and approaches,
includes Community Land Trusts, mutual different terminology can cause
confusion. Our intention is to showcase
and cooperative, cohousing, self-build
the actual delivery elements of different
and others (Homes and Communities
organisations and not the specifics of
Agency 2011). ideology or relationship to different
models. What we discovered
(overwhelmingly) in case study evidence,
is a commonality in motivation to address
a local problem - be that people leaving
the area or antisocial behaviour - through
the management of housing.
PAGE18Small Scale Community Led Housing
5.3 How many organisations own
and manage community
housing?
One of the great surprises from this • 182 Tenant Management Organisations
research has been the realisation that the (TMO’s)
sector is far bigger than we had
anticipated. We set out to consider how • 736 Housing Co-operatives
many different organisations own, • 113 Self Help Housing Organisations
manage or develop less than 250 housing
units. The following figures are numbers • 29 Development Trusts
of organisations with completed schemes • 19 Community Land Trusts (CLT’s)
and are not representative of the volume
of developing community housing • 18 Cohousing communities
projects.
• Around 1,300 registered charities
Whilst in essence we have only scratched
owning, managing, delivering or
the surface it is apparent that this is a
supporting housing services across
vibrant and sustainable sector and there is
England and Wales.
a lot to be learned from these
• A network of 1,669 Almshouse organisations that could benefit
organisations communities across the UK.
• 1,386 Registered Providers of whom
47% have less than 250 homes
“One of the great surprises from this research has
been the realisation that the sector is far bigger that
we had anticipated. ”
PAGE19Small Scale Community Led Housing
Types of Organisations in the UK showing approximate number of projects
Development
CLT’s Trusts Co-housing
19 29 Communities
18
Almshouse
Registered Organisations
Providers 1,669
1,386 Charities
164,000
Self-help
Housing Co-operative TMO’s
113 Housing 182
736
Overall, less than 1% of UK housing is organisations. Local knowledge and
provided by small community housing connections drive outcomes that are
providers (Gulliver & Handy 2014, Lupton multifaceted and that connect people to
and McRoberts 2014). This compares less places in a meaningful way. Providing
than favourably with other European homes to people that mainstream
neighbours where, for example, on paper, providers are reluctant to house is one
up to 10% of homes are community aspect of this, but community housing
owned and managed (though heavily providers go further looking to enhance
sheltered by large public housing the quality of life, and develop life skills
companies in the development stages). among tenants with different needs. This
The purpose of this report is not to look at isn’t a response that will replace
implementation strategies for scaling up mainstream housing provision but it
and down, but to give insight into the should trail-blaze and it can provide the
practices and benefits of truly community inspiration for how housing could be
owned and managed housing provided.
“Evidence shows that when there is effective local
community buy-in and management; that is where
the magic happens.”
PAGE20Small Scale Community Led Housing 6 SMALL-SCALE COMMUNITY OWNED & MANAGED HOUSING - A VIABLE PROPOSITION? Does the size and structure of small community housing organisations allow them to achieve their goals? PAGE21
Small Scale Community Led Housing
6.1 A brief analysis of
supplementary external
evidence
The original objective of this report was to There is well documented evidence of
try to find out how many small high levels of satisfaction with
community housing providers are cooperatively managed homes, with
operating (using our criteria as a definition approved ratings of services in the region
guide) and to understand the viability of of 90%; providing favourable comparison
business practices used. Our intention is; with the mainstream social housing sector
to provide information and guidance and (TSA 2009, Gulliver & Handy 2014). There
to give confidence to the very many is also new evidence emerging of the
developing community housing projects, ‘diseconomies of scale’ of large corporate
that this is a viable form of community service delivery which is unresponsive to
enterprise. It is also to provide to those understanding the causes of problems
vital enablers, such as local authorities, a and unable to act at a local level to deliver
deeper understanding of what can be solutions (Seddon 2014). As Seddon
achieved and that investment now can explains, demands for local public services
create a sustainable anchor organisation are person shaped and not service shaped
capable of operating with low risk and and therefore large corporate cost based
generating sufficient income to meet public sector organisations are not
costs. As already alluded to, we found necessarily the best type of organisational
significant gaps in available data and structure to meet the needs of local users
research to help us with the task of and that size and silo working can
discovering exactly how many escalate expenditure on issues that could
organisations are operating in this area. be more effectively targeted at a local
We are not the only ones to identify the level. In the Diseconomies of Scale
gaps in available data with Lupton and Report, John Seddon cited numerous
McRoberts (2014) commentating on the examples across social and health services
‘paucity of information on performance of provision where flawed service delivery
small community housing associations structures led to poor outcomes, waste
with less than 1000 units in Housemark’. and expense. One example reports a local
authority requiring a community
We are conscious that the research
organisation to work with a development
methodology selected in this report may
partner housing association, to benefit
give rise to criticism that there is an
from their experience. The third sector
insufficient sample base to construct an
organisation is still driving the
argument that supports our case. We have
development, however the cost of the
therefore looked at external sources to
development project has escalated.
augment the basis of this report, and
found the following independent
accounts of the viability of small
community housing providers.
PAGE22Small Scale Community Led Housing
Lupton and McRoberts’ 2014 report grants that pay out at different points in
(Smaller Housing Associations - time. We also would concur that whilst
Capacity to Develop New Homes) for there is evidence that some balance
the Joseph Rowntree Foundation sheets can cope with increased lending
assessed the potential of small for new development, the length and
community housing providers to costs of loan finance is a significant factor
develop new homes. They found that to increasing capacity. We found very
the financial performance and key ratios stable governance arrangements and that
(gearing, interest cover and average organisations had no difficulty in retaining
operating margins) compares favourably and attracting suitably qualified staff.
with the mainstream sector (Lupton & However we should acknowledge that the
McRoberts 2014 pg10). However, they current job market may have facilitated
did question if there is sufficient this favourable position.
development capacity within the sector
Lupton and McRoberts suggest a
to evaluate financial risks and debt
spectrum of operating choices for small
gearing against future unsecured
community housing providers; ranging
income and the use of reserve income.
from positioning to be the manager of
The report authors do acknowledge the
choice, developing market homes to meet
potential of small housing providers to
broader needs in the housing market,
utilise local knowledge and connections
diversifying business activities, focus on
to support business objectives and that
specialist housing services and developing
this can bring, for example, community
consortia to share the costs of
support for development, lower
development expertise, in for example,
development costs and faster
leverage for finance and accessing grant,
development timescales. It is
increased security and other services cost
acknowledged that smaller housing
savings. Inherently, there are many
providers have focused management
questions and points to consider in some
arrangements capable of assessing need
of these suggestions, including how to
and opportunities when organisations
develop effective partnerships that can
are value led. We found that the case
lever in support without undermining
studies evaluated in this report did not
local control and ownership, the very
exhibit some of the factors that Lupton
factor that underpins the operational basis
and McRoberts alluded to, for example,
of community housing providers. We also
under-developed capacity to realise the
need to put this report into context -
potential for growth. The organisations
analysing the potential for growth is not a
we studied had built the required
primary function of this report. Perhaps in
development capacity to respond to the
an age dominated with a narrative about
Community Empty Homes Fund and
growth and consolidation into large
had developed sufficient risk strategies
structures, there needs to emerge support
to manage cash flow during the period.
and acceptance of some scales of
However we would not wish to propose
operation being viable and desirable to
that these are not real inherent risks,
meet certain needs that are unmet
particularly when it comes to managing
elsewhere. Government needs to resist
cash flow from numerous contracts and
PAGE23Small Scale Community Led Housing
the temptation to scale successful procurement of good and services and
community innovation and should capacity to take on large projects. The
celebrate diversity in provision (Seddon perceived and prevailing wisdom of
2014). There is definitely a case for having a few very large social housing
scaling out rather than up. providers has to be challenged, for what is
the primary focus of achieving cost
The Chartered Institute of Housing, in
efficiencies if they do not lead to required
the 2012 research report ‘Does size
improved outcomes. The problem for
matter’, found no evidence of a
many small community housing providers
relationship between size, better quality
is that they are established to provide
and lower costs. The research also
extensive community benefit rather than
deduced that scale alone does not
just housing, and the current limited silo
automatically provide efficiencies, or
process of measuring value for money
that mergers necessarily result in lower
fails to recognise and value the other
costs and improved services. There are
extended community benefits that are
undoubtedly some advantages in, for
realised.
example, attracting debt capital,
“ The Chartered Institute of Housing, in the 2012
research report ‘Does size matter’, found no
evidence of a relationship between size, better
quality and lower costs. ”
PAGE24Small Scale Community Led Housing
7
CASE STUDIES OVERVIEW
The case studies selected represent a wide cross section of different
models and location types. There are some city based projects and
others from deep rural areas; some are relatively new whilst others
have been operating for decades, one (Bristol Charities) for 18
decades.
Most projects are letting their homes at The schemes we have chosen to
affordable or social rents. St Minver is the highlight in this report are:
exception and acts more as an enabler of • Back on the Map (Sunderland)
new housing, whilst retaining control of
the price of future sales of property • Bristol Charities
through resale price covenants. • Giroscope (Hull)
In terms of regulatory status, most of • Glendale Gateway Trust
those chosen are registered charities. In (Northumberland)
addition, some are companies limited by
guarantee and at least one has chosen to • LATCH (Leeds)
become a registered housing provider • Pembroke Estate TMO (Plymouth)
with the Homes and Communities Agency • St Minver CLT (Cornwall)
in recent years (Glendale Gateway Trust).
• Starley Housing Cooperative
(Coventry)
• Stonesfield (Oxon)
• Witton Lodge Community Association
(Birmingham)
PAGE25Small Scale Community Led Housing
How many
Organisation organisations
Location Status own
No of Asset Date Tenure New build Critical Financial
and manage community homes Value (as per est. type Conversion Relationships Viability
housing? audited Refurbish Health
accounts) -ment check
We’re being let down by public services
Back on the Charity 67 £4.5M 2001 Rental Rental Gentoo Yes
that onlySunderland
offer one-size-fits-all
map Refurbish- (Housing
solutions. We deserve better. We should ment Association)
be treated as people, not numbers. Sunderland
City Council
Bristol Bristol Charity 121 £26.8M 1835 Rental New build Local Yes
Charities and Authority
Refurbish- Health care
ment
Giroscope Hull Charity 84 £1.7M 1985 Rental Refurbish- Hull City Yes
ment Council
Self-Help
Housing
Glendale Wooler, Charity 18 £2.4M 1996 Rental Conversion/ Local Yes
Gateway Northum- Refurbish- Authority
Trust berland ment HCA
LATCH Leeds Community 62 £1.7M 1989 Rental Refurbish- Leeds City Yes
Benefit ment Council
Society
Pembroke Plymouth Ltd 160 £103,000 1994 Rental Management City Council Yes
Estate Company of existing Plymouth
(not for Community
profit) Homes
City College
St Minver Cornwall Charity 24 £67,000 2006 Below New build Local Yes
market authority
sales
Starley Coventry IPS 128 Unable to 1983 Rental Management Coventry
Housing obtain existing and City Council Yes
new build
Stonesfield Oxfordshire Charity 13 £1.4M 1983 Rental New build/ Parish Yes
Conversion Council
Local
Authority
Witton Perry Charity 167 £8.9M 1994 Rental Management Birmingham Yes
Lodge CA Common, +20 existing and City Council
Birmingham new build
PAGE26Small Scale Community Led Housing
7.2 Back on the Map (Sunderland)
Status Number of Location Other Assets or Asset value Date
homes Activities (as per established
audited
accounts)
Registered 67 Sunderland Community Hub, £4.5M 2001 (NDC
Charity and (freehold) Commercial Space, 2002)
development Welfare & Debt Advice,
trust. Health Advice and
Credit Union
Back on the Map was Back on the Map
established in 2001 as a fund the City
‘New Deal for Council to run
communities’ (NDC) the Selective
initiative to regenerate Licensing scheme
an area of Sunderland for Hendon, to
which suffered from improve private
multiple deprivation. It landlord property and tenancy
was one of 39 NDCs management. Back on the Map have
which formed the £54 million, 10 year identified key neighbourhoods which they
regeneration programme and is now fully target, purchasing property in some of the
autonomous and self-financing. Key streets most affected. Supported in the
interdependent issues affecting the area early years by Gentoo (a prominent North
were health, employment, education, the East housing provider), Back on the Map
dominance of poor quality housing stock, now manages its own property
a large number of homes badly managed maintenance, vetting and tenancies.
by private landlords and many empty
There are two company structures; Back
houses. In 2009, the then NDC
on the Map Enterprises is the wholly
partnership, took the decision to start
owned subsidiary of Back on the Map Ltd a
buying property in the streets worse
registered charitable company. They have
affected by absent private landlords and
learnt a great deal in recent years about
empty property. Alongside investment to
efficient financial structures, the
vastly improve the physical quality of
opportunities and limitations of an ex-NDC
housing, the NDC partnership researched
area involved in the provision of housing,
and built up a case for intervening in how
and especially about the maintenance of
private property is managed.
old terraced homes. The organisation
receives considerable support from the
community as well as the Council and has
recently taken on the library as an asset
transfer with a 25 year lease.
PAGE27Small Scale Community Led Housing
7.3 Bristol Charities
Status Number of Location Other Assets or Asset value Date
homes Activities (as per established
audited
accounts)
Registered 121 Bristol City Grant Giving, Day-care £26.8M 1835
Charity Services including
Dementia Care
Housing is their only enterprise that
makes a surplus; it is provided by a
separately managed charity within Bristol
Charities (Orchard Homes).
Their board of trustees is made up of
people with appropriate professional skills
including an architect, a barrister, two
solicitors, and several accountants.
Key partners include the local authority
and health care providers. Bristol Charities
have a growth agenda and are looking to
deliver 50 more homes in the next 3
years.
Bristol Charities owns and manages 112
units of Almshouse accommodation and
a further 9 family houses which they let
at open market value. Most of the “Bristol Charities have
properties they own were bequeathed;
they have been steadily working through
a growth agenda and
a programme of demolition or sale of old
sites and re-investing in new build.
are looking to deliver
The charity is involved in much wider 50 more homes in the
charitable activity including day care
services and grant giving and has a total
next 3 years.”
of 24 staff, 60% of whom are care
workers.
PAGE28Small Scale Community Led Housing
7.4 Giroscope
Status Number of Location Other Assets or Asset value Date
homes Activities (as per established
audited
accounts)
Registered 84 Hull Various commercial £1.5 1985
Charity, units - tenants include
company community bakery,
limited by fruit and veg
guarantee organisation, training
rooms, roofer,
upholsterer and
renovation store.
Their tenants are often referred to them
by neighbouring organisations. Some
have high support needs. A number of
their volunteers and employees are
tenants; some tenants have been with
them 15-20 years.
Giroscope have strong links to the local
authority and Self-help Housing, and have
taken full advantage of the Empty Homes
Programme using their reserves to lever in
additional support and significantly
Giroscope was formed by a group of increasing their housing stock in the last
students and unemployed people two years.
concerned about housing need and the
poor state of local properties. The group
invested their own, limited resources and
persuaded friends and relatives to support
them and invest in further acquisitions and
refurbishment.
Registering as a charity in 2009, the
organisation retains a strong community
focus and commitment enabling new
businesses to start-up in their properties,
as well as the provision of educational
courses.
PAGE29Small Scale Community Led Housing
7.5 Glendale Gateway Trust
Status Number of Location Other Assets or Asset value Date
homes Activities (as per established
audited
accounts)
Registered 18 Wooler, 2 Retail Units, 54 £2.4M 1996
Charity, Northumberland Bed Youth Hostel,
Company Multipurpose
limited by Community
Guarantee, Space with
Registered Business Start-up,
Provider Library, Tourist
Information.
new Empty Homes Programme, they
were able to increase it again to the
current 18 units.
The Trust have minimised borrowing by
attracting generous grants, working with
the local authority on asset transfer
schemes and setting up a community
bond scheme - which alone attracted
£128,000 from local supporters.
Glendale Gateway Trust are engaged in a
wide range of regeneration activity
including ownership and management of
a community hub, their local Youth Hostel
and various smaller community projects
Located in a deep rural area, the Trust was as well as regional and national research.
set up with a broad remit. Initially
focussed on development and
management of a community resource
centre, the Trust became committed to “The Trust is committed
addressing the issue of empty commercial
and residential properties. Their first to addressing the issue
homes were let to young people in 2004
and an interest in Community Land Trusts of empty commercial
and changes at the Homes and
Communities Agency enabled them to
and residential
double their housing stock to 8 units in
2011. After another acquisition and the
properties. ”
PAGE30Small Scale Community Led Housing
7.6 LATCH (Leeds Action to Create Homes)
Status Number of Location Other Assets or Asset value (as Date
homes Activities per audited established
accounts)
Community 62 Leeds Volunteer Training, £1.7 million (not 1989
Benefit Supported Housing including all 62
Society, tax Services, properties as not
exempt Management Office all acquired at last
charity status audited accounts
date.)
In 2014, LATCH celebrated an amazing 25
years of refurbishing abandoned property,
working with volunteers to renovate
“Over the last 3 years
homes and manage their portfolio. During they have brought 25
that time they have experimented and
pushed the boundaries, refurbishing a long term empty
large number of houses in the
Chapeltown area of Leeds. The recently properties in to use,
renovated properties have been
completed to a high standard of thermal providing volunteering
performance; EPC rating B. The properties
are let to homeless people for social rent. opportunities to over
Over the last 3 years they have brought 25
long term empty properties in to use,
52 people. ”
providing volunteering opportunities to
over 52 people. It started with the
founders seeing the potential and acting
on it to bring - the very many - empty
homes back into use to meet the needs of
the homeless. The transfer of 2 properties
from Leeds City Council on a lease
enabled the organisation to get going. In
recent years, LATCH has been in a good
position to benefit from the Community
Empty Homes Fund and refurbish further
properties.
PAGE31Small Scale Community Led Housing
7.7 Pembroke Estate TMO
Status Number of Location Other Assets or Asset value Date
homes Activities (as per audited established
accounts)
Tenant 160 Plymouth Youth Work, (Assets not owned 1994
Management Repair and by TMO)
Organisation Maintenance £103,000
(TMO) contracts
Whilst the TMO do not own the
properties, they are responsible for day to
day management and maintenance, and
run additional services such as a youth
club and a summer youth programme.
The finances to run the TMO are subject
to a contractual agreement with Plymouth
Community Homes (PCH) who own the
properties – they currently receive
£137,000pa from PCH to cover their
running costs.
All TMO’s are subject to a continuation
ballot – residents have the option every 5
years to revert back to management by
the landlord rather than the TMO.
According to the National Federation of
TMOs, this has never happened in any of
the ballots that have taken place.
Pembroke Estate TMO emerged in
response to huge anti-social behaviour
issues following the collapse of local “...responsible for day to
industry in the 1980’s. At the time, the
homes were owned and managed by the
day management and
local authority but residents wanted to maintenance, and run
deal with the problems themselves.
The homes are part of a high rise
additional services such
development, and of the 160 homes in
the development, 20 are in private
as a youth club and a
ownership having been the subject of summer youth
‘right to buy’.
programme. ”
PAGE32Small Scale Community Led Housing
7.8 St. Minver Cornwall
Status Number of Location Other Assets Asset value Date
homes or Activities (as per audited established
accounts)
Registered 20 (Not owned St. Minver, None (Assets not owned 2006
Charity and but have an Cornwall by CLT)
CLT interest) £67,000
St. Minver CLT was established following This enabled the CLT to employ a project
recognition of exorbitant house prices in manager and build the houses with input
the immediate area, and a need to from each of the selected home owners
support local young people to retain a (each homeowner had to work 20 hours
balanced population. per week on the scheme to reduce build
costs).
The project is an unusual one, though highly
replicable – St. Minver enabled 24 new, self- Once completed, the homes were then
build homes in a rural community. 20 were sold to the allocated owners at
sold at well below market value with approximately 32% of open market value
restrictive covenants for resale. (OMV) with strict covenants i.e. the
properties can only be resold at the same
Key to kick-starting the CLT, was the offer
ratio to OMV. First option of purchase
of land for affordable homes well below
goes to St. Minver CLT, and the CLT must
market value by a sympathetic landowner.
be in agreement with the new allocation.
St. Minver CLT then worked closely with
St. Minver have ambitions to replicate the
their local authority who offered an
first phase of the development.
interest free loan of over £500,000 as well
as a small grant.
PAGE33Small Scale Community Led Housing
7.9 Starley Housing Cooperative
Status Number of Location Other Assets or Asset value Date
homes Activities (as per audited established
accounts)
IPS, registered 128 Coventry Communal Room Unable to obtain 1983
housing for External Hire
provider.
demonstrating the value and recognition
of the housing coop as a desirable
method of procuring much needed social
housing. Starley Housing Coop,
Birmingham Cooperative Housing
Services and Accord Housing worked
together to raise the finance and design
the scheme. The Cooperative has a strong
ethos, delivered through allocation
procedures and the style of community
governance adopted, of reflecting the
wider society; it supports people with
In the 1970s, Coventry City Council
mental health support needs, old, young,
threatened to demolish the Victorian row
people earning and those not in current
of terraced houses on Starley Street to
paid employment. The Coop houses
make way for the new ring road. The
vulnerable people and provides informal
community fought a successful campaign
support through cooperation and
to save the homes for the people who
reciprocity.
lived there, and in doing so, the
cooperative was formed. The cooperative
accessed funding to refurbish the homes
and the community rejoiced. One “The community
celebration resulted in the painting of a
mural on the whole side of the end house fought a successful
on the terrace. This symbol of people
power became a prominent reminder for campaign to save the
the whole city, visible because of the
prime location of the coop, a stone’s homes for the people
throw from the city centre.
who lived there, and
Since then Starley Housing Coop has
doubled from its original size, developing in doing so, the
60 plus apartments on land gifted to the
coop from Coventry City Council, cooperative was
formed. ”
PAGE34You can also read
