Search results

English social housing providers are increasingly turning to social impact measurement to assess their social value. This paper aims to understand the contextual factors causing this rise in the practice, specifically within this sector; the mechanisms that enable it to be effectively implemented within an individual organisation and the outcomes of successful implementation for individual organisations and more widely across the sector and beyond.

A realist theory-based approach is applied to the study of a small number of social housing organisations and leaders within the sector to explore the use of social impact measurement. The paper addresses three questions: Why is social impact measurement being adopted in this sector? How is it successfully implemented? And what happens (outcomes) when it is successfully implemented? Addressing these questions necessitates deeper insight into the contextual pressures that have brought to the fore social impact measurement within the sector and the beneficial outcomes the practice provides (or is anticipated to provide) to social housing providers. The methodological approach of Realist Evaluation (Pawson and Tilley, 1997, 2004) is used to structure and analyse the empirical data and findings into a programme theory for social impact measurement. Realist Evaluation provides a programme theory perspective, seeking to answer the question “what works, for whom and in what circumstances?”. In this research, the “whom” refers to English social housing providers and the circumstances are the contextual conditions experienced by the sector over the past decade. The programme theory aims to set out the links between the contextual drivers for social impact measurement, the mechanisms that bring about its implementation and the outcomes that occur as a result. Within this, greater detail on the implementation perspective is provided by developing an implementation theory using a Theory of Change approach (Connell et al., 1995; Fulbright-Anderson et al., 1998). The implementation theory is then embedded within the wider programme theory so as to bring the two elements together, thereby creating a refinement of the overall theory for social impact measurement. In turn, this paper demonstrates its importance (the outcomes that it can achieve for organisations and the sector) and how it can effectively be implemented to bring about those outcomes.

Social housing providers use social impact measurement both internally, to determine their organisational priorities and externally, to demonstrate their value to local and national governments and cross-sector partners then to shape and influence resource allocation. The practice itself is shown to be an open and active programme, rather than a fixed calculative practice.

The intensive nature of the research means that only a limited number of cases were explored. Further research could test theories developed here against evidence collected from a wider range of cases, e.g. other types of providers or non-adopters.

The research makes a strong contribution to practice in the form of a re-conceptualisation of how social impact measurement can be shown to be effective, based on a deeper understanding of causal mechanisms, how they interact and the outcomes that result. This is of value to the sector as such information could help other organisations both to understand the value of social impact measurement and to provide practical guidance on how to implement it effectively.

As the practice of impact measurement continues to develop, practitioners will need to be aware of any changes to these contextual factors and consider questions such as: is the context still supportive of impact measurement? Does the practice need to be adjusted to meet the needs of the current context? For instance, the recent tragedy at Grenfell Tower has led to a reconsideration of the role of social housing; a new Green Paper is currently being drafted (Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government, 2018). This may have a number of implications for social impact measurement, such as a rebalancing of emphasis on outcomes relating to environmental improvements, towards outcomes relating to the well-being of tenants.

Existing literature is largely limited to technical guides. This paper links theory-based evaluation to practice contributing to social housing practice.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a research agenda to underpin leadership development activity in the social housing sector, in the light of an identified need for effective leadership in this sector owing to the continual reform and changes it faces.

A literature review is conducted by searching a number of business and management, along with social sciences, databases and texts with the primary focus being leadership and management in social housing. Secondary focus is based around public sector organisations and agencies such as the police and education owing to lack of research in social housing.

There is a pressing need for leadership development in social housing, yet there is a limited evidence base from which to develop effective development interventions. The most relevant models of leadership appear to be those which focus on inter‐organisational and cross‐sector collaboration, but further research is required to develop a clearer picture of the nature of the leadership challenge within this sector.

The paper is only seen as a first stage as it attempts to draw from what has been already published. The paper develops the own research agenda for a second phase of empirical research in order to continue the debate further.

The paper adds to the discussion and debate around leadership in general but more crucially brings to the surface a number of questions not posed previously that involve the starting‐point for detailed empirical research. Relevant case examples exist within the National Health Service and education, but social housing has remained immune from this up until now.

Increasingly, attention has been given to the need to mainstream risk reduction in development work in order to reduce the vulnerability of the urban poor. Using El Salvador as a case study, the paper analyses the mainstreaming process in the developmental disciplines of urban planning and housing. The overall aim is to identify how the existing separation between risk reduction, urban planning and housing can be overcome and integration achieved.

Since Hurricane Mitch in 1998, and especially after the 2001 earthquakes, not only relief and development organisations, but also social housing organisations have initiated a shift to include risk reduction in their fields of action in order to address the underlying causes of urban vulnerability. The factors that triggered the process were: 1) the negative experiences of organisations with non-integral projects, 2) the organisations' increased emphasis on working with municipal development, 3) political changes at national level, and more importantly, 4) the introduction and promotion of the concept of risk reduction by international and regional aid organisations. However, required additional knowledge and institutional capacities were mainly built up independently and internally by each organisation, and not through the creation of co-operative partnerships, thus duplicating efforts and increasing ineffective competition.

Whilst positive experience has been gained through the implementation of more integral projects, the creation of adequate operational, organisational, institutional and legal frameworks is still in its initial stage. Unfortunately, four years after the 2001 earthquakes, emergency relief funding for post-disaster risk reduction is coming to an end without the allocation of resources for following up and consolidating the initial process. Based on the findings, an integral model is proposed which shows how mainstreaming risk reduction in urban planning and housing could be dealt with in such a way that it becomes more integrated, inclusive and sustainable within a developmental context.

The social housing sector is under increasing pressure to do more with less and provide value for money as part of the UK Government’s public debt reduction strategy. This study aims to explore the current practices towards unlocking social value in the housing sector through the adoption of the Social Value Act 2012. The Social Value Act seeks to ensure that public sector procurement deliver added value in terms of social, economic and environmental outcomes.

The study adopts quantitative research methodology through a survey with 100 housing professionals charged with the delivery of social value outcomes in the social housing sector in England.

The results of the study reveal that there is a low level of understanding of the Social Value Act 2012 among the professionals in the social housing sector. Once again, most organisations in the social housing sector do not have social value strategies or policies and rarely consider social value outcomes during procurement. However, employment skills and training and crime and antisocial behaviour reduction are the most social value priority outcomes/needs identified with organisations currently promoting social value in the social housing sector.

The issue of social value has importance towards the wider society, and the study provides an insight into current practices towards the realisation of social value outcomes in the housing sector.

The Social Value Act 2012 came into force in January 2013, and little has been written on the impact of the Act on the social housing sector in England. This study identifies current practices in the social housing sector towards the delivery of social value outcomes in the day-to-day business operations.

The main aim of this study is to ascertain the progress in implementing the actions contained within the BME Housing Action Plan for Wales, by the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) and social landlords in Wales.

The research was carried out between December 2004 and May 2005. This paper discusses some of the main findings from the systematic review of BME housing strategies and action plans covering 22 local authorities and 32 housing associations in Wales.

It was clear from all aspects of the research that the WAG's BME Housing Action Plan for Wales is having a positive impact on the profile and awareness of BME housing issues in Wales. However, the degree and extent of progress varied throughout Wales.

BME housing issues have a high profile in the social housing sector in Wales. It is important that this positive profile is maintained and does not lose momentum due to increasing and competing priorities.

Currently, the lack of incentives for compliance (and penalties for non‐compliance) presents a potential disincentive to the long‐term sustainability of the present enthusiasm and momentum on BME housing issues in Wales.

This research is the first to evaluate the progress made by social landlords in implementing the WAG's BME Housing Action Plan for Wales.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how social housing providers could respond to residents living with dementia in non-specialist housing.

A research framework was developed from published material and used to assess how dementia friendly a national housing provider was, and what could be different. Electronic surveys were completed by 209 members of staff; semi-structured interviews with 18 senior managers and an external contractor; a customer focus group with five residents. A literature review and telephone interviews with housing providers identified current areas of innovation and good practice which informed the research recommendations.

There are ways a non-specialist social housing provider can develop dementia friendly services through developing a customer focused approach, staff awareness raising and training, and through working collaboratively with specialist statutory and non-statutory services across health and social care. These have the potential to impact positively on the quality of life of residents with dementia or caring for people with dementia.

Social housing providers should be considering their older residents, and how they can design and develop services to respond to specific needs.

There is limited understanding of how mainstream housing providers could and should develop an offer for their residents living with dementia. This research provides an assessment approach and has developed ideas about what this offer could look like.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the organizational construction of profit at the responsibility-centre level, how underlying cost calculations are challenged, and the role of accountants therein.

This paper analyses profit calculation in a public social housing organization that experienced New Public Management (NPM). Participant observations, archives and interviews inform the study over three years, enabling access to day-to-day practices.

This study examines a trial of strength that revisited long-existing profitability and cost calculations. Accountants held competing views of how to treat labour costs. Some were anti-programme during a trial of incompatibility, while others were programme defenders. The authors also provide evidence of the stability of an established network and its resistance to the claims of an adversary spokesperson in a trial of strength. The concept of trial of incompatibility proved helpful in showing how the actor networks within OMEGA played out the tension between profit orientation and the social mission of offering affordable dwellings.

The paper provides rare qualitative data on the significant and complex role of calculative costing choices in determining intra-organizational profitability and its interference with the inherent social mission of the organization.

The authors suggest that profitability calculations are influenced not only by economic context but also by different views of organizational actors regarding how to calculate profit. These calculations would benefit from a more detailed and explicit documentation of reasons for choices made, given the potential for different and, in principle, equally valid approaches. The authors provide further evidence of the complexity of the public social housing sector.

This research points to a departure from the mission of public social housing in the face of NPM reforms and further questions the compatibility of a profit orientation with the provision of affordable dwellings.

The findings show intra-accounting variation regarding a specific element of profit calculation (labour costs) relating to the organization’s wider mission and status.

Given a number of recent and ongoing changes to the role and responsibilities of executive and non‐executive board members of UK social housing organisations, the paper aims to offer a literature review which explores the development provision for board members within such organisations. The paper's key question is: “How are executive and non‐executive board members being prepared for these changes?”

A systematic literature review was undertaken, based on the main business and management databases. This was followed by a thematic analysis to uncover what we know about executive and non‐executive board member training and development within the public and voluntary sectors, in particular within UK social housing organisations.

Despite the increasingly important role of boards in the not‐for‐profit sector, only a limited number of publications focusing on human resource development (HRD) issues were found. The literature did provide some insight into the HRD experiences of executive and non‐executive board members. The majority of papers centred on leadership and governance matters, mainly board effectiveness, performance and “board capital”, rather than human capital. In so far as board member development is discussed, it is mainly in relation to their recruitment to the board and the sort of skills required, with little attention given to matters such as succession planning and member development.

Given the limited extent of research to date into executive and non‐executive board development in social housing organisations, it follows that there is limited knowledge of what is – or is not – happening in practice. This highlights the need for more empirical research, on the basis of which it should be possible to offer suggestions for changes to/improvements in board member development activities.

The paper reviews the current state of knowledge relating to executive and non‐executive board member development in not‐for‐profit and social housing organisations.

This paper seeks to suggest that social housing can and should be the local hub for cost‐effective, human‐scale health and wellbeing. It aims to explore the way that community‐based housing providers can help health and social care services to deliver long‐term wellbeing.

The argument is illustrated with examples of constructive practice drawn from membership of the PlaceShapers Group of housing associations, across different parts of England.

Localism and promotion of public health lie at the roots of social housing, dating back more than 150 years. Because of their physical stake and presence in communities, social landlords are able to offer combined homes and support in a way and on a scale that few private operators can match. So social housing providers are in a prime position to add value and recast the relationship between health, wellbeing, social care and housing. But social housing organisations and their leaders will need to be highly inventive, enterprising and determined to reap the full rewards for service users and neighbourhoods.

Changes to the health, wellbeing and social care landscape, coming into effect in England and Wales from April 2013, present a unique opportunity to bridge the “parallel worlds” of housing and health. Local housing providers now have the chance to bond their long‐term presence, commitment and investment in communities to the new outcomes required for health and social care.

The lead author is chair of a grouping of community‐based housing associations working throughout England and is especially well placed to identify examples of innovative practice, such as those described in the paper.

The purpose of this paper is to report on a field-level examination of the adoption of sustainable procurement in social housing. It explores the role of regulation and procurement consortia in sustainable procurement.

The study employs a case study of the UK social housing sector and uses an online survey (n=116) of UK Housing Associations. Factor analysis identifies three parsimonious dimensions of sustainable procurement. Attitudinal data are analysed to explore the field-level adoption of sustainable procurement and the role of consortia.

The results delineate sustainable procurement activities into three factors; direction setting, supplier-centric assurance and local socially oriented supply. High yet sup-optimal levels of sustainable procurement activity are revealed. Prevailing attitudes identify positive commitments to sustainable procurement at individual, organisational and sector levels. The value of network collaboration is identified. Tenants as critical stakeholders do not prioritise sustainable procurement creating challenge for inclusivity. Regulators are seen to a have low level of sustainable procurement knowledge and procurement consortia a high perceived knowledge.

Results provide insight into the effect of sustainable procurement policy, the role of regulators and network structures and consortia, raising issues around legitimacy, coopetition, stakeholder engagement, performance measurement, and functional/sectoral maturity.

The identification of the potential exclusion of tenants in sustainability debates is particularly significant to deliver social value.

The relative newness of the social housing sector and its quasi-public sector status provides an original contribution to the consortia and sustainable procurement literatures.