Report of Team Job Title

Simon Kwong Chief Executive Directorate Director of Performance and Service Development

Name of Meeting Date of Meeting Agenda Item Status

LBI Communities Review Committee

14 March 2011 B1 Information

Tenant Management Organisations and Co-ops

in Islington

1

Contents 1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 3

2 Background ......................................................................................................... 3

3 Legal Position of TMOs ....................................................................................... 4

4 TMO Finances..................................................................................................... 6

5 Services provided by TMOs ................................................................................ 9

6 Taking on or handing back a service................................................................. 17

7 Equality and Diversity ........................................................................................ 19

8 Clienting and monitoring.................................................................................... 20

9 Support.............................................................................................................. 28

10 TMO employment issues ............................................................................... 29

11 TMO membership .......................................................................................... 30

12 Setting up a new TMO ................................................................................... 31

13 NFTMO Benchmarking .................................................................................. 33

Appendix A TMO/C Delegated Responsibilities List .......................................... 36

Appendix B TMO Monthly Performance Information.......................................... 37

Appendix C Monitoring of TMOs ......................................................................... 38

Appendix D TMO household membership and attendance at annual general meetings ........................................................................................................ 45

Appendix E TMO Employment........................................................................... 47

Appendix F Principles of allowance calculation for Islington TMO’s ................ 49

Appendix G Sample Internal Audit report ........................................................... 54

Additional information resulting from January’s meeting is highlighted in grey throughout the report.

2

1 Introduction

1.1 This paper outlines the current position in respect of the 25 Tenant Management Organisations and Co operatives that operate in Islington and highlights some of the current issues that exist in relations between the Council, Homes for Islington and individual TMOs.

2 Background

2.1 Tenant management is a form of housing management in which the residents in an area take on the responsibility of providing some or all housing management tasks on behalf of the Council. Tenant Management Organisations operate in housing associations as well as in local authorities but only council tenants have a legal right to manage. The landlord still owns the property and, in the case of local authority housing, tenants remain tenants of the Council. To take over management, the tenants must set up a properly constituted organisation – a tenant management organisation (TMO). The TMO committee members become directors with responsibilities to run the organisation in accordance with the TMO rules, within the law and in line with good governance codes. The responsibilities of the council and the TMO are negotiated and set out in a management agreement.1

2.2 There are currently 15 tenant management organisations (TMOs), one estate management board (EMB) and nine tenant management co-operatives (TMCs) managing services for properties owned by Islington Council. They are collectively responsible for the partial management of some 4000 properties and details of when they were established and the numbers of properties in management are in the table below. TMCs are the same as TMOs in all but name. The EMB operates as if it were a TMO although its management agreement is slightly different. In this report the term TMO is used to include TMCs and the EMB. One TMO (St Luke’s) closed down voluntarily in 2005.

Table 1. Tenant Management Organisations in Islington. Tenanted and leasehold properties managed

TMO Properties Start Date

Arch Elm Co-op 95 1980

Bemerton Villages TMO 737 2000

Blackstock TMO 185 2002

Braithwaite House TMO 108 2003

Brooke Park Co-op 111 1980

Brunswick Close TMO 268 2003

1 Extract from the Guide to the Right to Manage, DCLG, 2007, Crown Copyright

3

Table 1. Tenant Management Organisations in Islington. Tenanted and leasehold properties managed

TMO Properties Start Date

Charteris Co-op 127 1976

Dixon Clark Court TMO 60 1999

Elthorne 1st Co-op 133 1979

Gambier House TMO 115 2001

Half Moon crescent Co-op 190 1983

Harry Weston Co-op 124 1978

Holbrook Co-op 103 1979

Hornsey Lane EMB 173 1991

Miranda TMO 148 2001

Newbery House Co-op 54 1978

Pleydell TMO 280 2004

Quaker Court TMO 76 2001

Redbrick TMO 112 2001

Seaview Co-op 15 1986

Spa Green TMO 129 1995

Stafford Cripps TMO 180 2000

Taverner & Peckett TMO 165 2000

Wenlake TMO 119 2000

Weston Rise TMO 144 1994

Total properties 3951

2.3 The co-ops were an early manifestation of the TMO principle, created under the auspices of the Greater London Council. The majority of TMOs were established in the period 1999 to 2004. No new TMOs have been established since 2004; in fact one has closed down. One has taken on additional responsibilities in recent years but several TMOs have given up responsibilities including cyclical maintenance, voids and out-of-hours repairs.

2.4 Islington has the largest number of TMOs in the country (10% of the total). By comparison, Lambeth has 15, Southwark and Westminster both have 14 and Hackney 10.

3 Legal Position of TMOs

3.1 Parliament first passed legislation allowing the management of housing by co-ops in 1976. The Right to Manage (RTM) Regulations 1994 extended council tenants’ rights to manage their housing and provided a source of Government funding to support any application. The RTM guidance was revised in 2005 and new RTM Regulations were introduced in 2008. The legislation gives tenants an absolute right to undertake management functions relating to their homes, provided they can demonstrate competency and a sufficient level of support from residents in a defined geographical area. The legal framework

4

3.2 Residents may take on management of as little or as much as they wish and can relinquish or take on additional services at any time provided they meet the competency and community support requirements in the regulations and the terms of their management agreement. The council may only refuse where the proposed division of responsibilities between the TMO and the council is impractical, for example if the TMO wished to clean the ground floor of a block but not the upper floors.

3.3 TMO management agreements and governance

3.4 Each TMO has a management agreement with the Council. The format of the agreement is prescribed by the government under the Right to Manage Regulations and guidance. As contracts they are poor documents, tending to be vague and to leave many circumstances undefined and this can cause unnecessary difficulties between TMOs, HFI and the Council.

3.5 The management agreement incorporates inter alia the TMO’s rules, equal opportunities policy, financial & accounting procedures, employment procedures, key operational policies & procedures and the service specification and performance standards to which the TMO must operate.

3.6 The 25 TMOs currently operate under several different versions of management agreement. All nine co-ops signed new agreements based on the 2005 modular management agreement in 2007. 15 TMOs are currently on agreements based on the 1994 modular management agreement. Hornsey Lane is an Estate Management Board with a slightly different management agreement. However, in most respects, all the management agreements are very similar.

3.7 The Council delegated almost all of its responsibilities in the management agreement to Homes for Islington in 2004 when HFI was created. The responsibilities that the Council has retained are the budget for TMO allowances (although calculation and payment of allowances is done by HFI) and authority to serve notices for breach of the agreement or for performance failures.

3.8 TMO Governance

3.9 TMOs are not-for-profit companies registered with the Financial Services Authority under the Industrial and Provident Societies Act 1965 or as a company limited by guarantee under the provisions of the Companies Act 1985. All residents on the estate, tenants and leaseholders, are entitled to be members of the TMO on purchase of a share at a nominal rate but it is not compulsory. Average TMO membership is 57% of residents.

3.10 TMOs are managed by an elected committee of volunteers who live on the estate. The committee will include a chairperson, vice-chairperson, treasurer, secretary and a number of other committee members depending on the size of the estate. Committees normally meet monthly and TMOs hold an annual

5

3.11 All but two TMOs in Islington employ a manager to run their services although many are only part-time. They also employ caretakers and some employ repairs, administrative and accountancy staff. Some TMOs employ residents to provide services such as repairs but no committee member is allowed to be employed or remunerated by the TMO other than for expenses.

4 TMO Finances

4.1 Allowances

4.2 Councils are required to pay TMOs an allowance for the services they provide and an allowance to cover their overheads and other running costs. The government has issued guidance on how allowances must be calculated for tenants and for leaseholders. The overriding principle is that allowances should be based on the Council’s (or in Islington, HFI’s) own level of expenditure. Beyond that principle the guidance is in most respects very sketchy and thus leaves room for a great deal of discretion. There is no common methodology for calculating allowances amongst local authorities.

4.3 The allowance is different for tenants and leaseholders. For tenants the allowance is based on HFI’s expenditure and contains an amount for each of the services they provide plus an amount for their overheads such as HR, utilities and management costs. For most service or overhead costs, HFI calculates a unit cost per tenanted property and pays TMOs pro rata according to the number of properties it manages. In a small number of cases, the unit cost is based on a different unit to achieve a fairer apportionment of costs, e.g. concierge and grounds maintenance.

4.4 For leaseholders, TMOs set their own service charge to cover the cost of the services they deliver plus a proportion of their own overheads. They notify HFI of this amount before the start of the year and HFI pays it to the TMO together with the allowances for tenants. It is then recovered by HFI from leaseholders through the service charge collection process, which is run by HFI.

4.5 The document in Appendix F shows the principles used to calculate each item of allowances for TMOs in the “new” methodology developed in 2007. It is for information only and is not to be taken as a definitive explanation of how allowances are calculated. For exact details of the methodology, calculations and figures used to derive the allowances the TMO’s are sent a comprehensive spreadsheet including all the calculations for each individual TMO.

4.6 Having calculated and paid the allowance to a TMO, the council has no power to direct or control how it is used. TMOs must provide the services and operate according to their management agreement but are free to use their resources as they see fit as long as they keep within their management agreement and rules. In most years TMOs spend less than the allowance paid

6

4.7 LBI will pay a total of £3.2 million per annum in management allowances to TMO’s in 2010/11 (see Table 2 below). These allowances are in addition to the management fee paid by LBI to HFI.

4.8 Most TMO allowances are still calculated using an old methodology devised in the 1990’s. In 2009, TMOs challenged this methodology and a settlement was reached in 2010 that resulted in each TMO receiving an additional payment. HFI had already developed, in 2007, a new and much more detailed methodology which addressed the inherent problems of the old one and all nine TMCs had adopted it in 2007. However, despite the inherent problems with the old methodology only two TMOs have so far accepted it. The methodology is part of the management agreement and therefore cannot be changed without the TMO’s consent.

4.9 Although TMO allowances are based on HFI’s costs, TMO allowances have not been significantly affected by the efficiency savings made by HFI over the past six years. This is because the majority of HFI’s savings have been in areas that do not affect the calculation of allowances.

4.10 TMO reserves and surpluses

4.11 All TMOs have built up considerable reserves and surpluses over the years that they have been in operation. There is a significant distinction between reserves and surpluses in the management agreement of TMOs. Reserves are defined as working capital needed to maintain cash flow. Surpluses are amounts, which a TMO has accumulated over and above their reserve. In effect, surpluses are the savings that TMOs have made from the allowances received from the council. TMOs are entitled to retain their surpluses and if they spend them, must do so according to their rules.

4.12 Table 2 shows allowances paid in 2009/10, the surplus generated in that year and the accumulated surplus for each TMO. Harry Weston TMO holds the highest accumulated surplus of £1,311,587 whilst Weston Rise has the lowest at £28,563. Eleven TMOs have surpluses in excess of £100,000. TMO rules governing the expenditure of surpluses are broad and generally require benefit to the TMO or the community.

4.13 As the surpluses have been generated from council (Housing Revenue Account) funds it would be reasonable to expect that surpluses are used to improve the estate and living conditions of tenants (leaseholders must contribute their share separately).

4.14 TMO surpluses are generated from the allowance paid for tenants not leaseholders. There has been some debate over whether leaseholders should be charged for estate improvements financed from the surplus. Legal advice supports the view that leaseholders should be charged.

7

Table 2. TMO allowances paid and surplus/(deficit) held by TMOs

TMO 2009/10 allowance2 £

2009/10Surplus £

Surplus as % of allowance

Accumulated Surplus £

Arch Elm 87,963 43,441 49% 65,962

Bemerton 511,494 41,592 8% 74,208

Blackstock 130,271 16,611 13% 93,394*

Braithwaite 192,316 11,493 6% 37,743

Brooke Park 112,205 (10,105) -9% 400,242*

Brunswick 191,552 35,243 18% 234,211*

Charteris 84,785 8,644 10% 155,671*

Dixon Clark 38,074 (1,261) -3% 45,386*

Elthorne 1st 132,477 32,242 24% 125,810

Gambier 75,258 16,952 23% 162,340

Half Moon 220,597 69,449 31% 818,465

Harry Weston 117,682 (60,140) -51% 1,315,816

Holbrooke 110,741 (1,418) -1% 168,881

Hornsey Lane 122,008 6,903 6% 98,964

Miranda 101,500 24,620 24% 156,220*

Newbery 44,641 (4,063) -9% 120,701*

Pleydell 182,501 2,387 1% 190,717*

Quaker Court 52,198 3,416 7% 66,776*

Redbrick 76,653 5,398 7% 85,031*

Seaview 18,787 9,398 50% 77,882

Spa Green 94,644 5,518 6% 69,245*

Stafford Cripps 115,027 41,473 36% 86,050

Taverner & Peckett

96,500 2,113 2% 56,281*

Wenlake 85,299 13,625 16% 38,863*

Weston Rise 198,918 8,235 4% 28,563*

Total 3,194,091 321,766 10% 4,773,323

Source: TMO audited accounts 2009/10.

4.15 Cyclical Maintenance Allowances

4.16 TMOs that have responsibility for cyclical maintenance are paid an allowance specifically for that task and the money has to be held in an account jointly in the names of the TMO and the council. TMOs hold over £2.3 million in these accounts and the table below shows how much each has and the next date for works. TMOs with this responsibility have received this allowance in monthly instalments since their inception. However as no TMO has carried out its own

2 Excludes the allowance for cyclical maintenance which is ring-fenced and cannot be used by the TMO for any other purpose. * Where TMO accounts show a combined figure for reserve and surplus, an amount equivalent to three months expenditure has been deducted to represent the reserve and the remaining amount is shown in this table as surplus.

8

cyclical maintenance, the money has stayed in the joint accounts unused. HFI has sought to recover the unused allowances so that the resources can be put to use elsewhere. Whilst most TMOs have agreed, Redbrick, Quaker and Spa Green continue to contest the repayment and the issue is likely to go to arbitration. Six other TMOs have given up this responsibility in the past year.

Table 3. Cyclical maintenance reserves of TMOs with responsibility for cyclical maintenance

TMO Dates of lastworks

2010/11 allowance

£

Amount in acct up to 30/09/10. £

Programmed date for next works

Bemerton 2000 - 2004 100,901 722,652

Braithwaite No records 14,786 112,035 2012/13

Brunswick 2009 1 block only (Mulberry Ct)

36,691 221,414 2012/13 Remaining blocks:

Brunswick Ct, Emberton Ct, Wycliffe Ct, Harold Laski Hse

Dixon Clark Court

2010/11 8,214 105,192 2017/18

Gambier House No records 15,744 170,223 2011/12

Harry Weston Assume 2007 11,232 25,150 2014/15

Holbrook Assume 2007 9,329 15,606 2014/15

Quaker Court 2004/5 10,405 115,459 2012/13

Redbrick 2004/5 15,334 168,694 2012/13

Seaview 2010/11 1,359 29,277 TMC to hand back responsibility

Spa Green 2005/6 17,781 282,540 2013/14

Stafford Cripps No records 24,643 239,541 2012/13

Wenlake 2007 2 blocks only

(Anchor & Wenlake)

16,292 143,183 2012/13 Remaining blocks: Amias, Priestly &

Roby

Total 282,711 2,350,966

5 Services provided by TMOs

5.1 Whilst there may be a general perception that TMOs in Islington manage some 4,000 properties, none of them provides anything near a full range of services. All Islington TMOs provide a responsive repair service and all but two a caretaking service for their estate. Eight TMOs manage rent collection and low-level arrears recovery, but in each case, HFI takes over at the point when legal action is necessary. In addition, some TMOs have taken on other responsibilities including voids, cyclical maintenance (painting of exterior and common parts), lift maintenance and estate parking. A table of responsibilities is shown in Appendix A.

9

5.2 No TMO deals with tenancy management, antisocial behaviour, or major works (other than cyclical maintenance). None issues invoices to leaseholders, collects service charges or deals with leases and right to buy applications.

5.3 TMO Performance

5.4 HFI monitors TMO performance for the services they provide. Generally TMO performance is as good or better than HFI’s in responsive repairs and caretaking. Performance in rent collection is generally worse than HFI. Some key performance information is given below using data provided by TMOs. A table of all the performance indicators for TMOs is in Appendix B.

5.5 Complaints

5.6 TMOs handle their own complaints at stage 1 of the council’s complaints procedure. As the chart below shows, the number of complaints is generally low.

TMO Complaints 2008-10

0 1 0 1 14

1 03

1

15

4

15

0

5 6

24

02

0

84 5

26

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Arc

h E

lm

Bla

ckst

ock

Bra

ithw

aite

Bro

oke

Pa

rk

Bru

nsw

ick

Be

me

rto

n

Ch

art

eri

s

Dix

on

Cla

rke

Elth

orn

e F

irst

Ga

mb

ier

Ha

lf M

oo

n

Ha

rry

We

sto

n

Ho

lbro

ok

Ho

rnse

y L

an

e

Mir

an

da

Ne

wb

ury

Ple

yde

ll

Qu

ake

r

Re

db

rick

Se

avi

ew

Sp

a G

ree

n

Sta

fford

Cri

pp

s

Ta

vern

er

& P

eck

ett

We

nla

ke

We

sto

n R

ise

Co

mp

lain

ts

5.7 TMO’s are responsible for complaints relating to the services they provide such as: caretaking, cleaning, repairs to properties or communal areas, behaviour or performance of TMO staff or committee members and claims for compensation for disrepair or loss of services provided.

5.8 Complaints are generally made to the manager of the TMO unless the manager forms part of the complaint, in which case it should be passed to the Secretary. The investigator is required to carry out an investigation and write a report, which includes the nature of the complaint, how it relates to the TMO, any evidence or statements made, a summary, conclusion and recommendations.

5.9 The report is submitted to the Secretary or the Chair (if the Secretary has investigated) and a decision on the outcome is added to the summary document, which is sent to the complainant. Complaints should be responded to within 21 calendar days (under the new LBI/HFI procedure) and should be

10

brought to the attention of the management committee at the following committee meeting.

5.10 All complaints relating to TMO issues are dealt with by the TMO in the first instance. Historically, where a complainant was dissatisfied with the response at stage 1, HFI’s TMO Team investigated and responded at stage 2 and it could then be escalated to LBI, at stage 3.

5.11 In July 2010 LBI/HFI’s complaints procedure changed from a three to a two-stage process, which effectively removed HFI from investigating the second stage of the process. The TMO team remain involved in the Chief Executive stage as information providers and advisers although LBI actually investigates and responds to the complainant. HFI currently incurs a fee of £350 per complaint, referred to CE stage regardless of responsibility and the procedure allows LBI to offer compensation on behalf of the TMO to a complainant of up to £250.

5.12 Training on the new LBI/HFI complaints procedure has been provided to TMO’s at the TMO Liaison Committee meeting in July 2010.

5.13 In the two-year period prior to the change in procedure, five complaints were logged at stage 2, of which two were not upheld, one partly upheld, one inconclusive and one upheld. Of these five, one was escalated to the Chief Executive stage.

5.14 Since the procedural change in July 2010, three complaints have been escalated to the Chief Executive Stage. One was partly upheld, one discontinued and one was not upheld.

5.15 The table below sets out the TMO complaints which have been escalated, over a two-year period.

Stage TMO Date

received Stage Outcome

Chief Executive Weston Rise TMO 07/04/09 Not Upheld

Chief Executive Quaker Court TMO 28/07/10 Partly Upheld Chief Executive Quaker Court TMO 08/09/10 Discontinued - CE

stage only Stage 2 Weston Rise TMO 06/03/09 Inconclusive Stage 2 Half Moon Crescent Co-op 11/03/09 Not Upheld Stage 2 Quaker Court TMO 07/12/09 Not Upheld Stage 2 Harry Weston Co-op 19/01/10 Partly Upheld Stage 2 Taverner & Peckett TMO 01/02/10 Upheld

5.16 Rent collection and arrears

5.17 Arrears at the eight rent collecting TMOs are higher than HFI in five and lower in three cases (see the chart below). It should be noted that TMOs are required to pay the full rent quarterly to the council regardless of whether they collect it so arrears are funded by the TMO with no loss to the council. There is

11

TMO Average Rent Arrears per Tenant 2009/10

£351

£521

£80 £80

£302£376

£37

£137

£711

£0

£200

£400

£600

£800

Bro

oke

Par

k

Cha

rter

is

Elth

orne

1st

Hal

fM

oon

Har

ryW

esto

n

Hol

broo

k

New

bury

Sea

view HF

I

£'s

5.18 Repairs

5.19 Some TMOs such as Bemerton Villages have dedicated staff to undertake repairs, others such as Braithwaite House and Gambier House have managers that also do repairs and others have contractors that are called upon as and when required such as at Quaker Court.

5.20 TMO repair responsibilities vary and are set out in the individual management agreements; there is however consistent expectation across the agreements that all non-urgent repairs should be completed within five days and all urgent repairs should be completed within 48hrs. The expectation as with all services adopted by TMOs is that the standard provided is equal to or better than that provided by HFI.

5.21 The chart below (figures supplied by TMOs) shows repair jobs completed within 48 hours in the current year. Three TMOs have not had any urgent repair issues at all this year and 17 TMOs completed 100% of jobs within the timescale. As a comparison, Kiers completed 98.2% of urgent jobs for HFI within the relevant timescale.

12

TMO Percentage of Urgent Repairs Completed in Time 2010/11

0

99 100 100 100 100

80

100

0

96 100

0

91100

93100 100 100 100 100 100 100

89100 100 98

0

40

80

120

Arc

h E

lm

Bem

erto

n

Bla

ckst

ock

Bra

ithw

aite

Bro

oke

Par

k

Bru

nsw

ick

Cha

rter

is

Dix

on C

lark

e

Elth

orne

Firs

t

Gam

bier

Hal

f M

oon

Har

ry W

esto

n

Hol

broo

k

Hor

nsey

Lan

e

Mira

nda

New

bury

Ple

ydel

l

Qua

ker

Red

bric

k

Sea

view

Spa

Gre

en

Sta

ffor

d C

ripps

Tav

erne

r &

Pec

kett

Wen

lake

Wes

ton

Ris

e

HF

I

%

5.22 Performance on non-urgent repairs is good and better in all but one TMO than HFI whose average completion time is 6 days.

TMO Non-Urgent Repair Completion Times 2010/11 YTD

11.89

1 1 12

1 1

2.3

6

1.6 2

3.2

1

2.41.8 1.6

4.45

1.0

3.12.1 2.2

8.3

2

6

0

2

4

6

8

10

Arc

h E

lm

Bem

erto

n

Bla

ckst

ock

Bra

ithw

aite

Bro

oke

Par

k

Bru

nsw

ick

Cha

rter

is

Dix

on C

lark

e

Elth

orne

Firs

t

Gam

bier

Hal

f Moo

n

Har

ry W

esto

n

Hol

broo

k

Hor

nsey

Lan

e

Mira

nda

New

bury

Ple

ydel

l

Qua

ker

Red

bric

k

Sea

view

Spa

Gre

en

Sta

fford

Crip

ps

Tav

erne

r &

Pec

kett

Wen

lake

Wes

ton

Ris

e

HF

I

Da

ys

5.23 Caretaking

5.24 The caretaking service is one of the main services that TMOs carry out. All TMOs have responsibility for caretaking except Seaview and Charteris which manage only street properties.

5.25 HFI has a programme of estate monitoring which includes TMOs so that caretaking at each TMO is inspected once a quarter. There are 24 activities monitored each of which is graded A, B, C or D with A being “All Clear” and D being “Very Poor”. The chart below shows the overall grades for the three years to 2009/10. Both TMOs and HFI have high standards with the TMO standard being slightly higher in two of the last three years.

13

TMO Caretaking 2007 - 2010

92.4

93.2

94.1

92.6 92.4

95

91

92

93

94

95

96

2007/8 2008/9 2009/10

% o

f A &

B G

rade

s

HFI TMO's

5.26 Lettings

5.27 LBI lets vacant properties through the Choice Based Letting Scheme (CBL) and TMOs are required to operate within this framework. Vacant properties are advertised in the local press, published at www.homeconnections.org.uk and on TV (Sky & Virgin) each week. The advertisement states that anyone interested in bidding for a property must be:

Registered on the Housing Register Have the minimum of 120 points An assessed need for the specific property advertised.

5.28 Only the nine co-ops (TMCs) have responsibility for lettings. Their management agreement allows them to select from a shortlist of the five applicants with the highest assessed points who have expressed an interest in the property through the CBL scheme. The council policy recognises that TMC’s have requirements which should be taken into account when letting vacant properties and TMC’s apply additional criteria of co-operability, as set out in their management agreements, when selecting tenants.

5.29 The TMC invites the five applicants to an interview with a panel of committee members. A scoring system is used and a record of the interview process is kept by the TMC for inspection. The TMC tells HFI of their choice of applicant and HFI advises the successful candidate and carries out the sign up process. The TMC should provide an ‘introduction to the organisation’ meeting and a ‘welcome pack’. If the TMC cannot find a suitable candidate from the five nominations provided, it must immediately request the next five applicants.

5.30 If HFI has reason to believe that the TMC has not complied with its selection procedure, it will consider further action including an HFI observer at the interviews. TMCs have the responsibility to maintain all tenancy files.

14

5.31 TMO’s have no responsibility for lettings and properties are let by the HFI area office through the Choice Based Lettings scheme. The only exception to this is the Local Lettings scheme (Intra- Estate).

5.32 When a TMO property is ready to let, the TMO should be notified of the viewing date and be invited to tell the applicants about the TMO. The TMO is required to provide a ‘welcome pack’ to the successful applicant. HFI will provide the TMO with the new tenants’ details and a copy of their tenancy agreement, but the responsibility to maintain the principle tenancy file remains with HFI.

5.33 Local lettings scheme

5.34 To assist TMOs in dealing with the housing needs of residents on their estates, every fifth vacancy within their stock can be ring-fenced for letting to an applicant already living on the estate. Whilst applicants must bid through the CBL scheme, under the local lettings scheme, priority for one in five lettings will be given to applications from existing TMO residents, even though their points total maybe lower than that of applications from candidates who do not reside on the estate.

5.35 Additional services provided by TMOs

5.36 TMO’s were requested to provide details of additional housing and non-housing services which they provide to their residents and are not included within the responsibilities set out in their management agreements: This information is set out in the table below.

TMO/C

Additional "Non-Housing" Services Other "Good Neighbour / Partnership" Services

Arch-Elm Co-op NO RESPONSE

Bemerton Villages TMO

Job Fairs, working employment coach, training resource centre, work experience trainees, team building, community development.

Consultation on future of estate, estate improvements, advocacy, working with other TMOs to re-negotiate allowances, gardening groups

Blackstock TMO NONE NONE

Braithwaite House TMO

NONE General help and advice, communal activities (fun day, table top sales, etc).

Brooke Park Co-op NONE Undertaking some Council responsibility repairs, e.g. door entry systems, grounds maintenance. Offering office facilities to assist the 2011 census.

Brunswick Close TMO

NONE Support for families in times of bereavement, fights and quarrels and ill health, give information, give help to disabled residents when required.

Charteris Co-op NO RESPONSE

Dixon Clark Court TMO

NO RESPONSE

15

Additional "Non-Housing"

TMO/C Services Other "Good Neighbour / Partnership" Services Elthorne First Co-op

NONE Support with letter writing/reading and administration for elderly/disabled residents and those with learning difficulties. Supporting key workers/social workers. Acting as delivery/collection point. Fostering a sense of community, e.g. through arranging social gatherings.

Gambier House TMO

Work experience training (Groundwork), management of community hall

Information and signposting on other services, providing support to residents, flexible service to people with “special needs”, receiving deliveries, evidence gathering, reporting and tackling ASB, advocacy, office services.

Half Moon Crescent Co-op

NONE Parcel collection, signing off passport applications, taking bulk refuge to recycling plant, assisting residents fill out blue badge applications.

Harry Weston Co-op

NO RESPONSE

Holbrook Co-op NONE Information and advice, training in office administration, TMO membership and related courses, social fund for resident events, gardening club and liaising with external organisations on neighbourhood issues.

Hornsey Lane EMB NO RESPONSE

Miranda TMO NONE NONE

Newbery House Co-op

NONE Community events held in the community garden during the Summer months

Pleydell TMO Hire of community hall. Work experience placements.

Gardening club, community garden in partnership with Moorfields hospital, advice and assistance to elderly and vulnerable tenants, collection of parcels.

Quaker Court TMO NONE Managing pram sheds and bike sheds, organising estate social events, advice and support to elderly residents, photocopying, faxing, and scanning facility, short-stay parking facilities, allotments, planning consultation meetings, parcels, gardening club, etc.

Redbrick TMO NONE Managing pram sheds and bike sheds, organising estate social events, advice and assistance to elderly residents, photocopying, faxing, and scanning facilities, short-stay parking facilities, gardening, bee keeping and honey production, planning consultation meetings, receiving parcels.

Seaview Co-op NO RESPONSE

Spa Green TMO Work experience and training

Information and signposting, “special needs” support, fundraising for charity, advocacy, family crises support, evidence gathering, reporting and tackling ASB.

Stafford Cripps TMO

NONE Local contact point providing early warning care umbrella for vulnerable and needy residents and referral/interface with Social Services, voluntary and non voluntary support organisations for these residents and those requiring non housing help and advice. Identification/resolution of issues before they become critical and intermediary action when failure/issues occur with other service providers. Flexible services and assistance to residents especially the elderly, vulnerable, disabled and isolated. Resident led.

Taverner & Peckett Square TMO

NONE Regular support & advice/information for residents on a range of issues

16

Additional "Non-Housing"

TMO/C Services Other "Good Neighbour / Partnership" Services Wenlake TMO NONE Helping vulnerable residents with shopping in bad

weather; occasional phone calls or visits to such residents; build up good relations with families and children; generally a hands-on approach to estate matters; referral to OT where considered necessary, etc.

Weston Rise TMO NONE Social services /care liaison

6 Taking on or handing back a service

6.1 Right to Manage Regulations state that if a TMO wishes to take on or hand back a service, it must obtain the support of a general meeting of its membership and serve four months written notice on the Council (HFI). When taking on a service, the TMO also needs to obtain certification from an ‘approved assessor’ of its capability of doing so. However, if the TMO merely wishes to modify the division of responsibilities for delegated services that it already manages, it can do so by mutual agreement with the Council (HFI).

6.2 Once the Right to Manage requirements are met the main points to complete the process are as follows:

HFI must produce a variation to the management agreement, incorporating the agreed changes, and obtain the approval of LBI Legal Services.

HFI must calculate the allowances to be given to the TMO figures (increase or decrease).

If the TMO is taking on a service the variation must include a service specification, performance standards and arrangements for performance monitoring of the additional service.

If the TMO is taking on a service the TMO must put in place appropriate operational arrangements for managing the service and tendering for contractors (if appropriate).

The HFI service area(s) responsible for the service must be alerted to the fact that the TMO wishes to take on or hand back these services. Where a contracted service is involved, the existing contractor should also be alerted.

The service area(s) in question must liaise with the TMO to discuss practical handover arrangements including the exchange of information, technical requirements, contract notice periods, TUPE consultation, and future liaison arrangements. Additionally insurance cover must be arranged and residents informed of the transfer of service and how they will access it in the future.

6.3 The table below sets out the TMOs who have taken on or handed back services with variations and the timelines of this process in the last four years. In that period three TMOs took on three new services and ten TMOs handed back fourteen services. Ten TMOs have handed back cyclical maintenance responsibility; two TMOs took on the responsibility for repairs to all voids in 2010 but handed this back to HFI within the same year;

17

TMO variations (taking on/handing back services)

TMO/C Service TO / HB Notificationof Interest

Cert of Competency

Cttee/GenMeeting

RTM Notice Variation Start Date

Arch-Elm Co-op Cyclical Redecoration

Hand Back

25/02/2009 Not Applicable 21/01/2009 Not Required

01/04/09 06/04/09

Bemerton Villages TMO

Lift Repair & Maintenance

Take On 19/09/2006 23/09/2008 23/09/2008 26/09/2008

20/11/2009 04/01/10

Bemerton Villages TMO

CCTV / Concierge

Take On 19/09/2006 23/09/2008 23/09/2008 26/09/2008

Discontinued

Bemerton Villages TMO

CCTV / Concierge

Take On 07/05/2010 23/09/2008 23/09/2008 26/09/2008

Ongoing

Bemerton Villages TMO

Door Entry Systems

Take On 19/09/2006 23/09/2008 23/09/2008 26/09/2008

Discontinued

Bemerton Villages TMO

Door Entry Systems

Take On 07/05/2010 23/09/2008 23/09/2008 26/09/2008

Ongoing

Bemerton Villages TMO

Estate Parking

Take On 11/01/2007 23/09/2008 23/09/2008 26/09/2008

Discontinued

Bemerton Villages TMO

Void Re-Servicing

Take On 17/03/2010 Ongoing

Blackstock TMO Cyclical Redecoration

Hand Back

09/11/2009 Not Applicable 13/10/2009 Not Required

19/01/2010 01/03/2010

Braithwaite House TMO

N/A None

Brooke Park Co-op

Cyclical Redecoration

Hand Back

31/03/2009 Not Applicable 11/02/2009 Not Required

01/04/2009 06/04/2009

Brunswick Close TMO

N/A None

Charteris Co-op Cyclical Redecoration

Hand Back

16/04/2009 Not Applicable 24/03/2009 Not Required

19/06/2009 06/04/2009

Dixon Clark Court TMO

N/A None

Elthorne First Co-op

Cyclical Redecoration

Hand Back

03/02/2009 Not Applicable 25/01/2009 Not Required

13/05/2009 13/05/2009

Gambier House TMO

N/A None

Half Moon Crescent Co-op

Cyclical Redecoration

Hand Back

17/07/2009 Not Applicable 16/07/2009 Not Required

22/09/2009 06/04/2009

Harry Weston Co-op

N/A None

Holbrook Co-op N/A None Hornsey Lane EMB

Grounds/Cyclical Maintenance

Hand Back

15/01/2009 Not Applicable 13/01/2009 Not Required

30/03/2009 06/04/2009

Miranda TMO Cyclical Redecoration

Hand Back

04/03/2009 Not Applicable 04/02/2009 Not Required

01/04/2009 01/04/2009

Miranda TMO Void Re-Servicing

Take On 24/03/2010 Not Applicable 22/03/2010 Mutual Agrmt

03/08/2010 01/05/2010

Miranda TMO Void Re-Servicing

Hand Back

01/07/2010 Not Applicable 30/06/2010 Not Required

03/08/2010 01/08/2010

Newbery House Co-op

Cyclical Redecoration

Hand Back

20/03/2009 Not Applicable 19/03/2009 Not Required

22/04/2009 01/05/2009

Pleydell TMO N/A None Quaker Court TMO

Emergency Out-of-Hours Repairs

Hand Back

Not Applicable

Not Applicable Not Applicable

Not Required

01/06/2008 01/06/2008

Redbrick TMO N/A None Seaview Co-op Cyclical

Redecoration Hand Back

04/11/2010 Not Applicable Ongoing

Spa Green TMO N/A None St Lukes TMO All services Hand

Back Not

ApplicableNot Applicable Not

ApplicableNot

Applicable

Not Applicable

01/12/2005

Stafford Cripps TMO

N/A None

Taverner & Peckett Square TMO

Emergency Out-of-Hours Repairs

Hand Back

15/08/2008 Not Applicable 14/08/2008 Not Required

01/10/2008 01/10/2008

18

TMO/C Service TO / HB Notificationof Interest

Cert of Competency

Cttee/Gen RTM Meeting Notice Variation Start Date

Taverner & Peckett Square TMO

Cyclical Redecoration

Hand Back

04/02/2010 Not Applicable 12/01/2010 Not Required

24/03/2010 28/02/2010

Taverner & Peckett Square TMO

Void Re-Servicing

Take On 25/03/2010 Not Applicable 30/03/2010 Mutual Agrmt

05/07/2010 01/05/2010

Taverner & Peckett Square TMO

Void Reservicing

Hand Back

23/11/2010 Not Applicable 30/11/2010 Mutual Agrmt

06/12/2010 04/12/2010

Wenlake TMO N/A None Weston Rise TMO

N/A None

7 Equality and Diversity

7.1 Under the terms of their Management Agreements with the Council, TMOs are required to operate equal opportunities policies and procedures in all aspects of their work. They must ensure that they do not discriminate against any person on the grounds of race, ethnic origin, disability, nationality, gender, sexuality, age, class, appearance, religion, responsibility for dependants, unrelated criminal convictions, being HIV positive or having AIDS, or any other matter which causes any person to be treated with injustice. A statement of a TMO’s Equal Opportunities Policy and Procedures is incorporated into its management agreement and this sets out its specific duties with regard to these overall requirements.

7.2 A TMO should provide a copy of its Equal Opportunities Policy and Procedures to every member (shareholder) of the TMO, every applicant for housing in a TMO property, and any other person who requests a copy. TMOs are required to keep proper records of the implementation of their Equal Opportunities Policies and Procedures in all aspects of their work including letting properties and admitting members, the employment of staff, committee membership, racial or other harassment and tenancy disputes, the appointment of contractors or consultants and the delivery of services. They are also required to ensure that TMO general members, committee members and staff have access to training opportunities on equalities and the equal opportunities policies and procedures of the TMO.

7.3 Each year, the Council (HFI) is required to monitor the effectiveness of the TMO’s Equal Opportunities Policy and Procedures and report to the TMO on its findings. In Islington, this is carried out as part of an Annual Governance Review. TMOs are required to take on board any changes the Council (HFI) may reasonably require in order to ensure that they comply with their commitment to implementing their Equal Opportunities Policy and Procedures.

7.4 TMOs are community-led organisations. They generally operate from an ethos of being good neighbours and offer an accessible, flexible service that caters for diverse needs. This includes home visits, assistance in filling out forms, prioritising repairs to address special needs, keeping an eye on elderly, vulnerable or isolated residents, referral to other agencies where appropriate.

19

7.5 TMOs are democratic organisations, with membership open to all residents on the estate. Their management committees are accountable to their general members through annual elections, general meetings and 5-yearly ballots of all residents (including non-members). TMO management committees are diverse and generally representative of the residents.

7.6 All TMOs have staff recruitment policies that incorporate equal opportunities requirements. TMOs have procedures in place to accommodate this.

7.7 Support and training provided to TMOs by HFI

HFI provides TMOs with a list of resident diversity/vulnerability data (annually)

HFI has organised training events for TMOs including “Tenant Management includes everyone” and “Equality and Diversity in Practice”.

HFI has provided TMOs with access to online diversity training. HFI has provided TMOs with a copy of its own Equality Impact

Assessment Policy and Procedure plus written guidance on monitoring the implementation of TMO Equal Opportunities Policies and Procedures.

HFI has provided TMOs with the Big Voice (telephone interpretation service)

HFI has provided TMOs with a template annual resident satisfaction survey form, incorporating diversity information.

HFI commissioned a Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) survey of TMO offices and advised the individual TMOs on achieving compliance with DDA requirements.

8 Clienting and monitoring

8.1 The government requires local authorities to have clienting arrangements for TMOs to ensure that the management functions are undertaken according to the management agreement. These functions will typically involve:

Calculation and payment of allowances for day-to-day management and any planned/capital works.

Overseeing governance of the TMO/TMC. Monitoring day to day performance. Overseeing financial management. Dealing with any disputes that arise from the operation of the management

agreement. Providing training on specialist areas or new legislation. Offering advice on issues such as diversity and procurement. Ensuring smooth operation between the authority and the TMO.

8.2 As part of the Council’s delegation of housing services to Homes for Islington, this work is undertaken by HFI’s TMO Team of four full-time staff (salary/costs £173k). Because TMOs are run by voluntary committees with members who have little or no experience of budgets, employment, operating a democratic

20

8.3 There is also a considerable amount of other HFI time spent working with TMOs including senior management time (particularly the Head of Performance and Director of Performance and Service Development), and staff in HFI Finance, Area Housing Offices and Property Services.

8.4 TMO Monitoring Issues

8.5 HFI’s monitoring is based on risk analysis to highlight non-compliance with the management agreement, performance issues and accepted standards for governance, financial management, equality and diversity, employment and customer service. It prevents problems arising in TMOs, considerably reduces the risk for the council, both financial and reputational, of such problems and highlights topics where TMOs might need training and support.

8.6 The TMO Team has developed this process in response to the problems that have arisen at TMOs. Amongst the issues that it has dealt with in the past five years are:

Fraud by a TMO manager submitting false invoices; The attempted theft of over £130,000 in a TMO’s cyclical maintenance

account; TMO committees failing to meet regularly; TMO committee meetings regularly being inquorate; TMO committees not receiving financial reports; Minutes of TMO committees not recording decisions or being a true record

of the meeting; TMO committee members receiving financial payments contrary to the

management agreement; TMOs not holding insurance for public liability, employment, etc TMOs not filing accounts on time; A TMO becoming insolvent; TMOs occupying council premises without a lease and without planning

permission; TMOs failing to follow procurement rules.

8.7 Annual review meetings

8.8 HFI has a comprehensive programme of monitoring with an annual performance review, annual finance review and annual governance review. The reviews are designed to cover all aspects of a TMO’s operation and its management agreement. In addition HFI monitors the performance of TMO committees and their finances through regular review of the TMO’s own committee papers and reports. The TMO Team attends committee meetings and the AGM for every TMO once a quarter.

8.9 For each review, HFI uses a checklist with each item having a risk rating (high, medium and low) so that HFI can take appropriate action depending on the

21

8.10 The Finance Review concentrates on the TMOs compliance with their financial procedures and financial requirements in their management agreement.

8.11 The Annual Review compares the performance of each TMO against that of HFI and the performance requirements of their management agreement.

8.12 The Governance Review focuses on how TMOs manage themselves and their compliance with their equalities & diversity policy and employment processes.

8.13 After each review meeting, HFI produces a report on the issues covered at the meeting. An improvement plan is then raised and monitored on a monthly basis by the TMO Team.

8.14 Desktop monitoring

8.15 In a separate exercise, the TMO Team carries out desktop monitoring three times a year by collating and reviewing key pieces of information produced by TMOs. It raises any concerns that arise from this exercise with the relevant TMO. Items which are monitored as part of the desktop review are:

TMO finance and budget reports to committee Minutes of and attendance at TMO committee meetings Performance indicators Estate inspection reports Caretaking scores Joint cyclical account bank statements Provision of leaseholder service charges Annual accounts and management letter Adequate reserve fund

8.16 Five year reviews

8.17 The TMO Management agreement requires the Council to monitor the total performance of the TMO, not less frequently than once every five years or more frequently than every two years, unless the Council has reason to believe that the TMO is failing to fulfil its responsibilities under their agreement.

8.18 The review includes:

Audit of financial controls Residents satisfaction survey Spot check on TMO repairs Grounds maintenance checks Caretaking Out of hours service Rent collection

22

Review of governance, employment and equality & diversity Review of the TMO’s performance.

8.19 As soon as practical after the review, the Council (HFI) produces a monitoring report which in addition to identifying deficiencies (if any) in the operation or performance of the TMO, makes positive recommendations on practical steps that can be taken to rectify such deficiencies.

8.20 A copy of the report is be submitted to the TMO who then have two months in which to respond. The response should set out the TMO’s plan and timescale for implementing all the recommendations it accepts and gives the TMO an opportunity to state the reasons why the TMO disagrees with any of the Council’s findings and provide evidence to show that the Council has reached incorrect conclusions.

8.21 If the TMO disagrees with the Council’s findings, the Council must give reasoned consideration to the TMO’s response and within one month either accept the TMO’s response and modify the findings and recommendations or give reasons why the TMO’s response is not accepted. The TMO is then required, within one month to submit its plan for implementing the recommendations in the monitoring report. If a disagreement still exists between the TMO and the Council as a result of this monitoring exercise, it will be dealt with under the TMO disputes procedure.

8.22 In each five-year review, HFI carries out a satisfaction survey of residents. The chart below summarises the satisfaction surveys from the five-year reviews. Satisfaction with TMO services is generally very high with the average score of 89% for overall satisfaction with the TMO.

TMO Average Satisfaction

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Sat

isfa

ctio

nw

ith C

lean

ing

of B

lock

s

Sat

isfa

ctio

nw

ith C

lean

ing

of th

e E

stat

e

Sat

isfa

ctio

nw

ith R

emov

alof

bul

k ite

ms

Sat

isfa

ctio

nw

ith g

roun

dsm

aint

enan

ceto

blo

ck

Sat

isfa

ctio

nw

ith g

roun

dsm

aint

enan

ceof

est

ate

Sat

isfa

ctio

nof

rep

airs

tote

nant

prop

ertie

s

Sat

isfa

ctio

nw

ith o

ut o

fho

urs

Ser

vice

Sat

isfa

ctio

nw

ith E

stat

eR

epai

rs

Sat

isfa

ctio

nw

ith O

ffice

Ava

ilabl

ity

Ove

rall

Sat

isfa

ctio

nw

ith T

MO

% S

ati

sfa

cti

on

Very Satisfied Fairly Satisfied Neither Fairly Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied No Opinion

8.23 LBI Internal Audit’s role in the 2-5 Year Review

8.24 The Council’s Internal Audit carries out the audit of financial controls. In the 15 audits carried out since 2007, five TMOs have been rated with reasonable or substantial assurance and ten with no or limited assurance. The table below gives a summary of the findings and further details are in Appendix C. Failures are addressed directly with the TMO to develop an improvement plan.

23

Summary of Internal Audit inspections of TMOs (2007-2010)

Number of TMOs

Total risks identified

High risks identified

Medium risks identified

Low risks identified

No assurance 2 38 22 11 5

Limited assurance 8 119 47 61 11

Reasonable assurance 3 12 0 12 0

Substantial assurance 2 0 0 0 0

Totals 15 169 69 84 16

8.25 The terms of reference for the audit by Internal Audit are:

There is an adequate governance structure in place with monthly board meetings being held;

Adequate and timely budget monitoring information is produced for the TMO/C Board and Homes for Islington;

Established procedures for HR management, recruitment selection, grievance and disciplinary activity are in place;

A framework/Code of Conduct document exists, which encourages and supports board members and staff in acting with integrity in the performance of their duties and in accordance with appropriate legal requirements, internal codes, rules and procedures, as set out in the Management Agreement.

There are specific procedures in place on key financial controls and governance procedures to ensure there is an effective TMO financial and governance control environment.

The audit will review all relevant documentation and records, which are deemed necessary to support the TMO/C’s operations, including financial transactions, governance and personnel.

8.26 Process of Internal Audit review:

The terms of reference are sent to the TMO/C; Internal Audit will arrange access to TMO premises; TMO will be sent a list of items/documents to prepare in advance of visit; Internal Audit will prepare draft report; HFI will meet with TMO to agree action on report recommendations; Responses to report recommendations sent to Internal Audit; HFI will monitor TMO actions and compliance with recommendations.

8.27 Appendix G is an example of an LBI Internal Audit report and contains the results of a recent audit of a TMO managing approx 150 units. All reference to the organisation has been removed for confidential reasons.

8.28 Assessment of TMO audited accounts

8.29 Each year HFI scrutinises the TMO audited accounts and auditor’s management letters to identify areas of concern. Any issues or concerns are

24

Accounts not provided by the due date set by the management agreement Accounts not signed off by the TMO treasurer and chair Management letters not provided Management letters not acted on by the TMO.

8.30 Although most TMOs have substantial surpluses, there have been two cases in the last three years where accounts have revealed potential insolvency and the TMO Team has had to negotiate a recovery plan.

8.31 TMO Liaison Committee

8.32 The management agreement states that the Council will hold no less than two TMO liaison committee meetings with TMOs each year. The purpose of this committee is to discuss strategic issues and matters of general policy. Historically TMOs have declined to take a role in organising the agendas and so the TMO Team manages the agenda, takes minutes and invites relevant speakers as well as providing presentations on current topics of interest to TMOs.

8.33 Reports to LBI and HFI Performance Management Committee

8.34 The TMO Team provides a quarterly report to LBI. The report provides regular updates on the results and action taken from the monitoring of TMOs and highlights any areas of concern identified through these processes. Tables of results of the finance, annual and governance reviews are included along with a year to date summary of the performance indicators provided by the TMOs.

8.35 HFI’s Performance Management Committee (PMC) holds and annual scrutiny of TMO performance and the TMO Team presents a comprehensive report to this committee on the outcomes of all monitoring throughout the year, any issues which impact on HFI and the council and recommendations for improvements.

8.36 Projects

8.37 In addition to the continuous monitoring and support of TMOs, the TMO Team carries out one-off projects which focus on enhancing partnership working with TMOs and developing or improving HFI’s systems with TMOs. Projects carried out in the past three years include:

Negotiating new management agreements based on the 2005 modular management agreement with the nine Co-ops;

Developing a new methodology to calculate allowances for TMOs; Negotiating a new monitoring system with TMOs involving annual audits of

finance, governance, performance, equalities, employment, customer service;

Negotiating with TMOs a new set of performance indicators to be provided monthly to HFI;

Surveying all TMO offices for compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act, negotiating with TMOs and monitoring the necessary action to ensure compliance;

25

Encouraging and facilitating the amalgamation of four homesteads co-ops into a single organisation (Seaview);

Negotiating the close down and transfer back to HFI of the other homestead co-ops;

Establishing correct joint cyclical accounts for all TMOs that have this service responsibility and ensuring joint accounts hold the correct amounts;

Re-launching the TMO Liaison Committee meetings and revising the terms of reference.

Reviewing all TMO office accommodation and the opportunities for making more efficient use of premises;

Developing an annual residents survey template for all TMOs to survey their residents;

Developing a protocol defining the roles and relationship between LBI, HFI and TMOs.

Getting planning permission for all TMO offices Developing leases for all TMO offices with office plans and approval for

charging peppercorn rents; Carrying out an opinion survey of TMOs about HFI services; Developing an extranet website to allow TMOs secure access to HFI’s

policies and procedures as well as other relevant information.

8.38 Performance Indicators

8.39 PI’s are defined in Chapter 7, Annex A of the 1994 Management Agreement which all TMO’s are signed up to and Chapter 8 of the 2005 management agreement that all TMC’s have adopted. Appendix A refers to the 1994 agreement and appendix B, the 2005 agreement.

8.40 A TMO’s performance is monitored by several systems, which includes PI’s collected from each TMO on a monthly basis.

8.41 PI’s were originally introduced to TMO’s in 2005/6 and were a component of a new monitoring system. Initial returns were sporadic and in various formats with inconsistent content and both the TMO’s and HFI felt that not all data collected was useful to monitor.

8.42 In 2007, HFI invited TMOs to review the PIs and set up a working group consisting of representatives from Gambier, Miranda, Brook Park, Half Moon and Bemerton TMOs. The working group held in excess of five meetings to agree a new set of 13 PIs covering complaints, rent arrears, responsive repairs and ASB. The report has had minor changes since its inception and is now an 11-point report (see Appendix B).

8.43 Some TMO’s have additional services and therefore have to provide PI’s that specifically relate to these services. Weston Rise and Braithwaite manage the concierge services on their estates and provide PI’s relating to ASB incidents and logged and reports written.

8.44 Caretaking inspections on TMO estates are now being undertaken again and area housing office staff currently carry out monthly inspections. Reports will

26

be created from the database that will allow comparisons amongst TMO managed estates and HFI’s directly managed estates.

8.45 LBI/HFI/TMO relationship

8.46 The National Federation of TMOs (NFTMO) and the National Federation of ALMO’s (NFA) held a joint conference in November 2006 to discuss the relationship between TMOs, local authorities and ALMO’s. TMOs were keen to clarify the role and responsibilities of ALMO’s particularly where local authorities had delegated their management agreement responsibilities to their ALMO.

8.47 From that conference, a working group was appointed to develop a guidance, which was eventually published, with government backing, in March 2009. The guidance explains the different roles of TMOs, ALMO’s and local authorities and offers good practice guidance for managing the relationships.

8.48 The guidance recommends a model agreement to set out the roles and responsibilities of the three parties. HFI developed this for Islington in consultation with TMOs and it was published as guidance in early 2010. All parties agreed that a formal agreement was not necessary in the circumstances in Islington.

8.49 LBI’s role in clienting TMO’s

8.50 HFI is responsible for clienting TMOs on the council’s behalf. The council’s Social Housing Partnerships Team (SHPT) is responsible for clienting Homes for Islington (HFI) on the Council’s behalf. As part of this, HFI refers to the SHPT for key decisions around TMOs. The SHPT spends approximately 10% to 15% of their time on TMO-related issues. The Service Director, Housing, holds overall responsibility for TMOs and has been involved in isolated projects, such as the allowances settlement.

8.51 The main forum for liaison between HFI’s TMO clienting team and the council is the monthly meeting attended by HFI’s Director of Performance and Service Development and Head of Performance and the SHPT. TMOs is a standing agenda item. Issues are discussed and key decisions that need to be made are agreed. A representative from the SHPT also attends the bi-annual TMO liaison meeting.

8.52 HFI provides the SHPT with a quarterly TMO update report. This summarises TMO performance and monitoring, such as the outcome of review meetings throughout the year and risk ratings, performance indicators, internal audit inspections and general issues on TMO’s. Any exceptions are then discussed at the monthly strategic liaison meetings.

8.53 HFI also provide the council with their monthly performance reports. These include TMO performance. Again, any exceptions are discussed at the monthly strategic liaison meetings.

27

8.54 The SHPT work with the TMO team on specific projects, such as granting leases to TMOs for occupation of their offices.

8.55 Requirement for escalation to LBI

8.56 There is an agreed protocol between HFI’s TMO clienting team and the SHPT, which sets out when issues should be escalated to the council for decision or information. HFI must refer to the council for consent on the following issues:

Serving breach notices Serving warning notices Serving termination notices Serving supervision notices HFI must inform and update the council on the following issues: Residents approaching HFI to set up a TMO Issuing repair notices Carrying out special reviews in response to TMOs failing under their

management agreements Proposals to vary TMOs’ management agreements.

9 Support

9.1 A primary function of the TMO Team is to support TMOs. TMO committee members are volunteers and generally do not have experience of managing staff or budgets. Although most TMOs employ a manager, the managers are very isolated in their post and do not always have the breadth of skills that is required of them. Consequently, the TMO Team spends a significant proportion of time in providing a telephone helpline to managers, advising them on how to deal with issues that they are unfamiliar or unsure of.

9.2 HFI carries out a wide range of services at TMO estates, from rent collection to tenancy management, lift maintenance to major repairs. The TMO Team has a key role to facilitate the relationship between HFI and TMOs particularly where HFI works directly on TMO estates.

9.3 Training

9.4 The TMO Team provides support to TMOs through regular training and briefing events. The training covers operational, financial and governance topics and caters for both TMO staff and committee members. The team also holds four forum sessions per year for TMO managers which focus on operational issues. Other HFI departments also deliver training on legislative changes and HFI’s policies and procedures.

9.5 Since January 2009 HFI has provided training and managers’ forums on the following topics:

Procurement of contracts Personal safety for TMO managers

28

Internal Audit reviews Diagnosing repairs Employment training TMO management agreements Calculating leaseholder service charges Introduction for new committee members Producing a health and safety risk assessment Equality & diversity Rent arrears recovery.

9.6 TMO Extranet

9.7 The ability to share information with TMOs through the internet has been an objective of HFI for several years. In 2005, HFI provided computers and Citrix connections to all TMOs so they could access HFI’s intranet site and view relevant information there including HFI’s policies and procedures. However, this system proved to be ineffective and was withdrawn in 2009. HFI has now developed an extranet for TMOs. Through a password protected portal on HFI’s website TMOs can now access relevant parts of HFI’s intranet and keep themselves up to date with HFI and make use of HFI’s documentation, for example human resources and operational procedures to improve their own practices.

10 TMO employment issues

10.1 Most TMOs employ a manager or co-coordinator and other staff for repairs and caretaking. Many use agency staff for their caretaking services. Some of the larger TMOs employ administration staff or use consultants to assist with the running of their organisations. Some TMOs directly employ staff to carry out repairs whilst others rely on small contractors. See appendix E for more information on employment at each TMO. Only one TMO (Seaview) employs no staff directly.

10.2 TMOs have employment policies and procedures and HFI provides its own policies and procedures as they are updated. However, TMOs are employers in their own right and neither the council nor HFI has powers to intervene in employment issues. Six TMOs have on-going arrangements with employment consultants to advise on employment issues. Five TMOs have gone through employment tribunals in the last three years.

10.3 HFI is keen that TMO committees understand their responsibilities as employers and are able to fulfil their duties. The most recent HFI training session took place in October 2009 but the TMO Team regularly updates TMOs of other external training opportunities.

10.4 Employers must carry out health and safety risk assessments but a review of TMOs in November 2009 revealed that the majority had not carried out an assessment for their staff. HFI provided training in May 2010 but a second review in November 2010 showed 14 out of 24 had still not done a risk assessment.

29

10.5 Only five TMOs have an employer pension scheme for their staff. One has an enhanced pay system in lieu of pension. 18 have no pension scheme. It should be noted that HFI calculates TMO allowances using employee costs that include employer’s pension contribution but most TMOs are not passing this on to their staff.

10.6 HFI’s role in monitoring employment

10.7 As part of the annual Governance Review Meeting held in November of each year, HFI monitors the employment practice of TMOs including recruitment, contracts of employment, conditions of employment, health and safety risk assessments, pensions and training. At this review meeting, HFI requests copies of significant employment documentation to certify that the TMO is not only complying with its requirements as set out in its management agreement, but also with current legislation. TMO’s who fail to provide the relevant documentation at this meeting are required to provide it within a deadline.

10.8 The five year review includes an inspection by LBI’s Internal Audit team which covers the TMO’s established procedures for HR management, recruitment selection, code of conduct, grievance and disciplinary procedures.

10.9 HFI staff give general advice but do not get involved in specific cases or attend recruitment interviews, disciplinary or grievance hearings at TMOs. A TMO’s HR matters are its own exclusive responsibility and there are risks of HFI being drawn into employment tribunal or legal proceedings if its staff are involved in cases.

10.10 There are now only 3 TMO’s with staff within their employment who transferred from the Council under TUPE. The table below gives information on these.

TMO No of TUPE’d

Employers in employment

Members of Union Pension paid by TMO

Bemerton 1 Yes Yes Pleydell 1 Yes Yes Braithwaite 1 Yes Yes

11 TMO membership

11.1 Residents of TMO estates must purchase a £0.10 or £1.00 (depending on the rules) share in order to become members of the TMO. Although this is only a token payment, the fact that TMO residents have to go through the process of actually purchasing a share discourages some of them from becoming members of the TMO. This is in contrast to tenant and resident associations where all residents living in the catchment area are automatically deemed to be members and the membership is therefore de facto 100%.

11.2 In Islington, TMO shareholder numbers expressed as a percentage of the number of properties managed ranges from 21% to 134% with an average of

30

12 Setting up a new TMO

12.1 Between 2000 and 2004 twelve TMOs started operation and the most recent TMO to set up was Pleydell in 2004. No TMOs have started in the six years since then. There are no current developing TMOs in the borough although during the past three years five tenant and resident associations have enquired about becoming a TMO and the TMO Team has attended their committee meetings and discussed the process with the residents. On all occasions these TRA’s have decided not to proceed.

12.2 In very brief terms, the process to set up a TMO is:

Residents in a defined geographical area express an interest in directly managing certain housing functions.

If they are able to demonstrate a sufficient level of support, they can apply to the government for assistance to explore what is involved in taking on these management functions.

A third party organisation is then appointed to support the embryonic TMO. The third party will offer advice, support, training and guidance on issues such as financial management, governance etc.

If the embryonic TMO reaches a point where it feels it is capable of undertaking certain management functions, a ballot of residents is undertaken and the TMO can be established if a majority of residents vote in favour of the change.

The local authority is required to provide premises from which the TMO can operate and to furnish the premises for the TMO.

The local authority is required to calculate allowances which are paid to the TMO for undertaking the management functions which are to be transferred to the TMO.

The TMO and local authority sign a management agreement which outlines the responsibilities of both parties in relation to the transfer of management functions.

12.3 New TMOs

12.4 Since 2004 only two estates have expressed any interest in setting up a TMO.

12.5 Holly Park and Ilex House TRA’s met with SNU (development agency) on 17 July 2008 to explore setting up a TMO. HFI provided information and offered to meet with residents to discuss how tenant management works. On 30 July 2008, HFI (on behalf of LBI) signed the TMO’s pre-feasibility application to the Housing Corporation thus confirming its support.

31

12.6 The TRAs subsequently arranged a general resident meeting on 10 September 2008 and HFI asked to attend this meeting in order to lend support and also gain a better understanding of what residents wanted. However the TRAs decided that the residents would be better able to discuss this openly if there were no outside agencies present. HFI was invited to attend a subsequent Ilex House TRA meeting on 24 September 2008.

12.7 The chair of Holly Park TRA and other interested Holly Park TRA committee members also attended the Ilex House meeting on 24 September 2008. At this meeting it became clear that the TRAs were divided on the issue of establishing a TMO. At the end of this meeting, the Chair of Ilex House TRA announced that she was standing down from the committee.

12.8 In October 2008, both TRAs were invited to attend an HFI Induction Course run for TMO committee members. HFI made a request to attend their next committee meetings to discuss progress. Holly Park TRA responded by saying that tenants had lost interest in forming a TMO but they would invite HFI to a TRA meeting if things changed. Ilex House TRA reported that their new chair was considering moving from the estate and that there was a lot of division among residents about setting up a TMO.

12.9 It was left that the TRAs would contact HFI if they wished to pick up on TMO development again. There has been no further contact from either TRA.

12.10 Lower Hilldrop Community Residents Association (LHCRA)

12.11 Lower Hilldrop Community RA met with SNU (development agency) in March 2007 to explore setting up a TMO. In September a pre-feasibility study was completed and at the AGM on the 25th September the residents voted to serve a Right to Manage Notice on LBI/HFI.

12.12 HFI met with SNU on the 17th October to agree a project plan to work with the development agency and the TMO. HFI attended the following LHCRA meeting in November to meet the committee and offer support and guidance to develop the TMO.

12.13 SNU embarked on the formal feasibility study in January 2008 and over the next three months the committee attended a training programme carried out by SNU. LHCRA held a well attended AGM in May and feedback to the residents that the TMO was on course to ‘go live’ within 2 years.

12.14 A test of opinion was carried out in June and 112 tenants and leaseholders voted (36% of eligible households), of whom 106 declared they were in favour of ‘entering into negotiations to develop a TMO’ and 6 voted ‘no’. However relationships between members of the committee started to break down and the chair resigned in June.

12.15 In July, SNU submitted an grant application for further funding but HFI had concerns that items listed as complete remained outstanding i.e. training had not been carried out. With the approval of the committee, HFI challenged this additional funding until milestones had been met. HFI assisted the committee to apply for funding under a new regime (Approved Assessor Scheme) introduced by the government which would give the committee more control

32

over their trainers and the type of training they received. In October, the new chair resigned.

12.16 There were delays to the Approved Assessor Scheme but in January 2009, the committee members were assessed and a report was produced. The report highlighted concerns with the training provided and the breakdown of relationship between committee members and recommended that the committee continue with an intensive training programme.

12.17 The few committee members left were unable to keep up the momentum of developing a TMO and at the AGM in 2009 there was no drive amongst the majority of residents in attendance to pursue the setting up of a TMO. There has been no further contact from LHCRA.

13 NFTMO Benchmarking

13.1 The National Federation of Tenant Management Organisations (NFTMO) is a national voluntary membership organisation. Their main purpose is to facilitate networking and support for TMOs in England and to promote community control as an option within regeneration initiatives and in areas of greatest need. The NFTMO was founded in 1992 and now has over 100 TMOs in membership. They have an executive committee that includes 21 community representatives from all parts of the country. The Federation employs one part time paid co-ordinator but otherwise all of the Federation’s work depends on voluntary effort.

13.2 The NFTMO provide a range of services. For example they:

promote and facilitate the exchange of experience and ideas between tenant management organisations and like-minded community initiatives.

identify and share examples of good practice and excellence – sometimes through good practice guides and publications.

provide a web-site. publish and distribute 3,000 free copies of a quarterly magazine. organise regional networking events and a national conference administer a TMO Benchmarking Network that enables TMOs to compare

their own effectiveness with other communities and to learn from those who are getting better results.

administer the TMO Good Governance Kite Mark promote and provide training through an annual programme of events.

13.3 One of the aims of the Federation is to disseminate good practice and to encourage national networking – strengthening the infrastructure for existing and future TMOs. The NFTMO publishes quarterly magazine as well as good practice guidance and briefing notes.

13.4 HouseMark

13.5 The NFTMO has joined forces with HouseMark to develop the national benchmarking service.HouseMark is a not for profit organisations, jointly owned by the Chartered Institute of House and the National Housing

33

Federation. Their aim is to help housing organisations to achieve improvement in service delivery and to meet the challenges of best value. HouseMark is the largest housing benchmarking club in the UK. They also have a comprehensive good practice database which members can use to support service reviews and improvement.

13.6 HouseMark has worked in partnership with the NFTMO throughout the TMO benchmarking project and support the Federation and its members in this initiative to give TMOs the opportunity to learn from one another and bring about best value

13.7 The NFTMO Kite Mark for TMO’s

13.8 The NFTMO’s good governance ‘kite mark’ for TMOs is a public symbol of good practice in a Tenant Management Organisation’s committee work, employment practices and accountability to its tenants. The Federation has also developed tools for involving TMO members and staff in a 'health check' to review the governance of the TMO. This may be a good way to start for most TMOs. You can then go on to apply for the Good Governance Kite Mark if it makes sense to do so but the health check is a worthwhile exercise in its own right.

13.9 The Kite Mark scheme is administered by the NFTMO, checked through independent external validation and supported by the government’s CLG and the TSA. In order to be awarded the Kite Mark TMOs have to:

Carry out a governance self-assessment check every two years. Agree an action plan to address any governance weakness that is

highlighted by the check. Host an ‘inspection’ visit by two assessors - people from the TMO world. Provide evidence that appropriate training is being offered to committee

members

13.10 The table below sets out those TMOs who have used the NFTMO benchmarking exercise and those who are members. The key points are:

No TMO’s have carried out the NFTMO Benchmarking exercise 14 out of the 19 TMO’s which responded are members of the NFTMO

TMO NFTMO Benchmarking

Result NFTMO Member

Arch-Elm Co-op No N/A N/P

Bemerton Villages TMO No N/A Yes

Blackstock TMO No N/A Yes

Braithwaite House TMO No N/A No

Brooke Park Co-op No N/A No

Brunswick Close TMO No N/A Yes

Charteris Co-op No N/A N/P

Dixon Clark Court TMO No N/A N/P

Elthorne First Co-op No N/A No

Gambier House TMO No N/A Yes

34

35

TMO NFTMO Benchmarking

Result NFTMO Member

Half Moon Crescent Co-op No N/A Yes

Harry Weston Co-op No N/A N/P

Holbrook Co-op No N/A Yes

Hornsey Lane EMB No N/A N/P

Miranda TMO No N/A Yes

Newbery House Co-op No N/A No

Pleydell TMO No N/A Yes

Quaker Court TMO No N/A Yes

Redbrick TMO No N/A Yes

Seaview Co-op No N/A N/P

Spa Green TMO No N/A Yes

Stafford Cripps TMO No N/A No

Taverner & Peckett Square TMO No N/A Yes

Wenlake TMO No N/A Yes

Weston Rise TMO No N/A Yes

N/P = Not provided

Appendix A TMO/C Delegated Responsibilities List

TMO provides service

TMO provides a partial service (voids < £2,000)

TMO nominally has responsibility for function (MMA) but the amenity does not exist.

TMO does not provide service (remains with HFI)

Responsive Repairs

Major Works

Estate Services

Tenancy Management

A more detailed breakdown of repairs responsibilities is given in the TMO Repair Responsibilities List (HFI Direct & ERS) spreadsheet TMO/C D

ay-t

o-da

y R

epai

rs

Gar

age

Rep

airs

Out

of

Hou

rs E

mer

genc

ies

OA

P D

ecor

atio

ns

Com

mun

al H

eatin

g

Indi

vidu

al H

eatin

g

Ent

ryph

ones

Lift

s

Voi

ds R

e-se

rvic

ing

Cyc

lical

Red

ecor

atio

ns

Oth

er M

ajor

Wor

ks

Car

etak

ing

Gro

unds

Ma

inte

nanc

e

Con

cier

ge /

CC

TV

Est

ate

park

ing

Allo

catio

ns

Ren

t col

lect

ion

(Fla

ts)

Ren

t col

lect

ion

(Gar

ages

)

Ten

ancy

Man

agem

ent

Arch-Elm Bemerton Blackstock Braithwaite House Brooke Park Brunswick Close Charteris Dixon Clark Court Elthorne First Gambier House Half Moon Crescent Harry Weston Holbrook Hornsey Lane Miranda New Roof Newbery House Pleydell Quaker Court Redbrick Seaview Spa Green Stafford Cripps Taverner and Peckett Sq

Wenlake Weston Rise

36

Appendix B TMO Monthly Performance Information TMO Monthly Performance Information This form is for the TMO to report performance to its committee and to HFI each month.

No. Category Description

TMO 1. Complaints Number of complaints received

TMO 2. Repairs Number of repair requests (all categories) received

TMO 3. Repairs Number of urgent repairs requests received

TMO 4. Repairs Number of urgent repairs received which were completed within time limits

TMO 5. Repairs Average time taken to complete non-urgent repairs

TMO 6. Voids Number of new voids serviced by the TMO

TMO 7. Anti-social behaviour

Number of ASB cases referred by the TMO to HFI for resolution

TMO 8. Rent Rent collected

TMO 9. Rent Rent due

TMO 10. Rent Total current rent arrears

TMO 11. Rent Number of tenants with more than seven weeks arrears

Please send this form by email to the Tenant Management Team at Homes for Islington: TMO.Team@homesforislington.org.uk by the 7th of each month.

37

Appendix C Monitoring of TMOs 1 Review meetings 1.1 The table below shows the number of significant risks identified for each

TMO in each of the review meetings held. An action plan is agreed with the TMO to resolve over a two-month period and the TMOs have always taken the necessary action. However as can be seen from the table, this does not mean that the TMO continues to manage and avoid risks. It implies the need for continual monitoring by HFI.

Summary of TMO Finance, Annual and Governance Reviews 2009 and 2010, High risk identified

Finance Annual Governance

TMO High Risks High Risks High Risks

Mar-09 Apr-10 Jul-09 Jul-10 Nov 09 Nov 10

Arch-Elm Co-op 3 0 0 0 1

Bemerton Villages TMO 7 4 1 0 1

Blackstock TMO 2 0 0 0 1

Braithwaite House TMO 5 5 1 1 1

Brooke-Park Co-op 1 0 1 2 0

Brunswick Close TMO 2 2 1 0 1

Charteris Co-op 0 1 4 3 2

Dixon Clark Court TMO 1 3 1 0 4

Elthorne 1st Co-op 1 0 3 2 0

Gambier House TMO 2 0 1 1 3

Half Moon Crescent Co-op 2 3 3 2 2

Harry Weston Co-op 3 12 0 1 3

Holbrook Co-op 3 3 4 3 2

Hornsey Lane EMB 0 1 1 0 2

Miranda TMO 0 0 0 1 0

Newbery House TMO 1 1 4 2 1

Pleydell TMO 0 2 1 1 0

Quaker Court TMO 0 5 1 2 1

Redbrick TMO 3 2 1 1 1

Seaview Co-op 4 3 2 0 0

Spa Green TMO 2 2 0 1 2

Stafford Cripps TMO 1 3 1 0 1

Taverner & Peckett TMO 0 4 0 1 1

38

Summary of TMO Finance, Annual and Governance Reviews 2009 and 2010, High risk identified

Finance Annual Governance

TMO High Risks High Risks High Risks

Wenlake TMO 1 0 0 0 1

Weston Rise TMO 1 3 0 1 1

Total risks 45 59 31 25 32

2 Five year reviews 2.1 Findings of Internal Audit inspections of TMOs (2007-2010) 2.2 The council’s Internal Audit carries out a detailed inspection of each TMO as

part of the five-year review. Risks are assessed against the criteria set out in Appendix H.

Findings of Internal Audit inspections of TMOs (2007-2010)

TMO/C Year of audit

Number of risks identified

High Medium Low

Assurance given

Blackstock 2007 5 11 5 No assurance

Miranda 2007 6 11 0 Limited assurance

Spa Green 2007 0 3 0 Reasonable assurance

Gambier 2007 2 7 1 Limited assurance

Braithwaite 2008 11 6 0 Limited assurance

Brunswick 2008 17 10 0 Limited assurance

Pleydell 2009 0 0 0 Substantial assurance

Newbery 2009 17 0 0 No assurance

Dixon Clark Court 2009 1 10 0 Limited assurance

Arch Elm 2009 0 3 0 Reasonable assurance

Charteris 2010 0 0 0 Substantial assurance

Hornsey Lane 2010 1 0 4 Limited assurance

Harry Weston 2010 9 3 0 Limited assurance

Wenlake 2010 0 6 0 Reasonable assurance

Half Moon 2010 0 14 0 Limited assurance

2.3 Repair Spot Checks 2.4 The council’s Internal Audit carries out a detailed inspection of each TMO as

part of the five-year review. Risks are assessed against the following criteria: 2.5 As part of the five year audit repairs are spot checked for quality by the TMO

Monitoring Team and a HFI surveyor. The chart below shows the results of these spot checks since the system was adopted. It shows the amount of repairs inspected and where the work was satisfactory and where either the

39

TMO

Number of repairs inspected Satisfactory

Action Required

Arch Elm 10 8 2

Blackstock 6 5 1

Braithwaite 11 9 2

Brunswick 14 10 4

Charteris 11 7 4

Dixon Clark Court 6 6 0

Harry Weston 5 4 1

Hornsey Lane EMB 9 8 1

Newbury 4 4 0

Taverner & Peckett 14 14 0

Wenlake 7 2 5

2.6 Resident Satisfaction Results 2.7 A satisfaction survey is sent to both tenants and leaseholders. The charts

below show the responses to the questions about the key services and issues.

Cleaning of Blocks

01020304050607080

Braithwaite Brunswick Dixon ClarkeCt

HarryWeston

HornseyLane

NewburyHouse

Taverner &Peckett

% S

atis

fact

ion

Very Satisfied Fairly Satisfied Neither Fairly Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied No Opinion

Satisfaction of Cleaning of Estates

01020304050607080

Braithwaite Brunswick Dixon ClarkeCt

HarryWeston

HornseyLane

NewburyHouse

Taverner &Peckett

% S

atis

fact

ion

Very Satisfied Fairly Satisfied Neither Fairly Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied No Opinion

40

Satisfaction with bulk refuge removal

01020304050607080

Braithwaite Brunswick Dixon ClarkeCt

HarryWeston

HornseyLane

NewburyHouse

Taverner &Peckett

% S

atis

fact

ion

Very Satisfied Fairly Satisfied Neither Fairly Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied No Opinion

Satisfaction with grounds maintenance of whole estate

0

20

40

60

80

100

Braithwaite Brunswick Dixon ClarkeCt

HarryWeston

HornseyLane

NewburyHouse

Taverner &Peckett

% S

atis

fact

ion

Very Satisfied Fairly Satisfied Neither Fairly Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied No Opinion

Staisfaction with TMO tenant repairs

010203040506070

Braithw aite Brunsw ick Charteris Dixon ClarkeCt

Harry Weston Hornsey Lane New buryHouse

Taverner &Peckett

% S

atis

fact

ion

Very Satisfied Fairly Satisf ied Neither Fairly Dissatisf ied Very Dissatisf ied No Opinion

41

Satisfaction wth Out of Hours Service

0

20

40

60

80

100

Brunswick Charteris Dixon ClarkeCt

HarryWeston

HornseyLane

NewburyHouse

Taverner &Peckett

% S

atis

fact

ion

Very Satisfied Fairly Satisfied Neither Fairly Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied No Opinion

Satisfaction with Estate Repairs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Brunswick Dixon Clarke Ct Hornsey Lane Newbury House Taverner & Peckett

% S

atis

fact

ion

Very Satisfied Fairly Satisfied Neither Fairly Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied No Opinion

Satisfaction with Office Availability

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Charteris Harry Weston

% S

atis

fact

ion

Very Satisfied Fairly Satisfied Neither Fairly Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied No Opinion

42

TMO Average Satisfaction

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Sat

isfa

ctio

n

with

Cle

anin

g

of B

lock

s

Sat

isfa

ctio

n

with

Cle

anin

g

of th

e E

stat

e

Sat

isfa

ctio

n

with

Rem

oval

of b

ulk

item

s

Sat

isfa

ctio

n

with

gro

unds

mai

nten

ance

to b

lock

Sat

isfa

ctio

n

with

gro

unds

mai

nten

ance

of e

stat

e

Sat

isfa

ctio

n

of rep

airs

to

tena

nt

prop

ertie

s

Sat

isfa

ctio

n

with

out

of

hour

s

Ser

vice

Sat

isfa

ctio

n

with

Est

ate

Rep

airs

Sat

isfa

ctio

n

with

Offi

ce

Ava

ilabl

ity

Ove

rall

Sat

isfa

ctio

n

with

TM

O

% S

ati

sfa

cti

on

Very Satisfied Fairly Satisfied Neither Fairly Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied No Opinion

Five year reviews – satisfaction scores %

Satisfaction with Very Satisfied

Fairly Satisfied Neither

Fairly Dissatisfied

Very Dissatisfied

No Opinion

Cleaning of Blocks 51 32 2 6 5 2

Cleaning of the Estate 50 35 1 5 5 3

Removal of bulk items 50 34 3 4 4 4

grounds maintenance to block 42 37 6 5 4 5

grounds maintenance of estate 51 33 4 4 5 2

repairs to tenant properties 43 33 2 6 8 2

out of hours Service 29 17 4 0 7 40

Estate Repairs 46 33 6 6 3 6

Office Availability 51 31 0 4 5 10

Overall Satisfaction with TMO 58 29 6 4 2 1

2.8 Continuation Ballots 2.9 Below are the results of the TMO ballots taken within the last three years. It is

clear that TMOs remain popular with those that vote but the percentage of those voting is not low. Braithwaite had the highest amount of votes to cease the TMO with over one quarter of the estate voting in favour to end the TMO. Continuation Ballots have not yet taken place on cooperatives, as their ballots are not due until 2012.

TMO Continuation Ballots

TMO Yes No % Yes % No % Response

Tenants 29 3 90.6 9.4 33.3 Braithwaite

Leaseholders 10 4 71.4 28.6 56

Brunswick Tenants 40 10 86 14 20

43

44

TMO Continuation Ballots

TMO Yes No % Yes % No % Response

Leaseholders 6 1 90 10 26

Tenants 21 0 100 0 43 Dixon Clarke Court Leaseholders 6 0 100 0 35

Tenants 29 0 100 0 28 Taverner & Peckett Leaseholders 9 0 100 0 14

Tenants 57 1 98 2 60 Wenlake

Leaseholders 13 0 100 0 33

Appendix D TMO household membership and attendance at annual general meetings

TMO membership and attendance at annual general meetings

Household membership

AGM attendance per household

TMO Properties No % No %

Arch-Elm Co-op 95 N/P N/P N/P N/P

Bemerton Villages TMO 737 165 22% 38 23%

Blackstock TMO 185 99 54% 35 35%

Braithwaite House TMO 108 56 52% 15 27%

Brooke Park Co-op 111 64 58% 26 41%

Brunswick Close TMO 268 110 41% 22 20%

Charteris Co-op 124 N/P N/P N/P N/P

Dixon Clark Court TMO 60 N/P N/P N/P N/P

Elthorne First Co-op 133 83 62% 21 25%

Gambier House TMO 115 60 52% 12 20%

Half Moon Crescent Co-op 226 156 69% 41 26%

Harry Weston Co-op 124 N/P N/P N/P N/P

Holbrook Co-op 103 84 82% 32 38%

Hornsey Lane EMB 173 N/P N/P N/P N/P

Miranda TMO 148 66 45% 16 24%

Newbery House Co-op 54 54 100% 30 56%

Pleydell TMO 280 140 50% 25 18%

Quaker Court TMO 76 53 70% 20 38%

Redbrick TMO 112 71 63% 20 28%

Seaview Co-op 15 N/P N/P N/P N/P

Spa Green TMO 129 73 57% 26 36%

Stafford Cripps TMO 180 60 33% 7 12%

Taverner & Peckett Square TMO 165 71 43% 17 24%

Wenlake TMO 119 80 67% 14 18%

Weston Rise TMO 144 80 56% 12 15%

TOTAL 3984 1625 41% 429 26% N/P = TMO not provided information Data gathered in January/ February 2011

45

Islington TMOs - Scatter ChartShareholders / Properties Managed

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

160%

0 200 400 600 800

Number of Properties Managed

Per

cen

tag

e M

emb

ersh

ip

Lambeth TMOs - Scatter ChartShareholders / Properties Managed

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Number of Properties Managed

Per

cen

tag

e M

emb

ersh

ip

46

Appendix E TMO Employment

TMO Number of staff

Employment Consultants

Employment Consultants Cost per year

Staff training

Employment Tribunals/Out of court settlement figure

Recruitment procedure

Handbook Contracts and job descriptions

System for annual pay rise

Health and safety risk assessment

Employer pension scheme

Arch-Elm 2 None No Yes None Yes No Yes No Yes No

Bemerton 11 Perm 4 agency

Yes £3,165 None None Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Blackstock 3 None No None None Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No

Braithwaite 6 Inc

concierge

None No None Awaiting info

Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes

Brooke Park

2 None No Yes None Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No

Brunswick 4 Yes £8,625 Yes None Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No

Charteris 1 None No Yes Yes Not upheld

Yes No Yes Yes No No

Dixon Clark 2

None No None None Yes No Yes Yes No No

Elthorne 1st 2 None No Yes None Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes

Gambier 4 None No Yes None Yes No Yes None No No

Half Moon Crescent

4 None No Yes None Yes Yes Yes No No No

Harry Weston

3

None No None None Yes No Yes No No No

Holbrook 2

None No Yes Yes Not upheld

Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes

Hornsey Lane

3 No No No None Yes No Yes Yes No No

Miranda 3 Yes £2040.00 None None Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

47

48

TMO Number of staff

Employment Consultants

Employment Consultants Cost per year

Staff training

Employment Tribunals/Out of court settlement figure

Recruitment procedure

Handbook Contracts and job descriptions

System for annual pay rise

Health and safety risk assessment

Employer pension scheme

Newbery House

3 None No None None Yes No Yes No No No

Pleydell 4 Yes £400.00 Yes None Yes Yes Yes Yes No No

Quaker 2 None No Yes None Yes Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A

Redbrick 3 Yes No None None Yes Yes Yes Yes No No

Seaview 0 N/A No N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Spa Green 3 None No Yes None Yes Yes Yes

Yes No

No

Stafford Cripps

3 None No Yes Settled at £10,000

Yes No Yes No Yes No

Taverner & Peckett

3 None No Yes None Yes Yes Yes Yes No No

Wenlake TMO

4 None No Yes None Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No but have an enhanced pay system

Weston Rise

7 Inc.

concierge

Yes £2568.00 Yes Settled at £760

Yes Yes Yes Yes No

No

Appendix F Principles of allowance calculation for Islington TMO’s

Allowance Item Explanation

Insurance costs

Employee, third party insurance

Cost charged to HFI for Employers Liability Insurance times percentage of HFI staff engaged in TMO work divided by the number of leaseholders and tenants managed by HFI multiplied by the number of tenants managed by the TMO.

Day to day repairs

Routine repairs to interior and exterior of dwellings

HFI responsive repairs budget divided by HFI tenants & HFI leaseholders (weighted to reflect the proportion of the budget allocated to internal works (tenants only) & external works (tenants and leaseholders)) multiplied by TMO tenants

Heating - individual systems HFI contract cost plus HFI management cost divided by HFI tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Heating - district

HFI contract cost plus HFI management cost divided by HFI tenants with district heating and HFI leaseholders with district heating multiplied by TMO tenants

Assisted decorations HFI assisted redecoration budget divided by HFI tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

CCTV

HFI CCTV maintenance budget divided by the number of CCTV cameras maintained by HFI multiplied by the number of CCTV cameras at the TMO

Door entry

HFI door entry maintenance budged divided by the number of door entry systems maintained by HFI multiplied by the number of door entry systems at the TMO

Lifts HFI lift maintenance budget divided by the number of lifts maintained by HFI multiplied by the number of

49

Allowance Item Explanation

lifts at the TMO

Voids

Repairs of voids to voids standard

HFI void repairs budget divided by HFI Tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Programmed repairs

Cyclical maintenance Borough cyclical budget divided by all HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO Leaseholders and Tenants

Estate Services

Caretaking service HFI caretaking budget (excluding non TMO services) divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants receiving caretaking multiplied by TMO tenants

Estate Services and quality HFI budget divided by HFI Leaseholders and Tenants receiving caretaking multiplied by BVMO tenants

Grounds maintenance

Cost of grounds maintenance charged to HFI divided by the number of square metres maintained by HFI multiplied by the number of square metres maintained by TMO. (Note: this methodology is due to be implemented for 2011/12 but is not used in the draft budgets published Dec 2010).

Repairs to paths, unadopted roads, estate lighting

HFI budget divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Concierge

HFI budget for concierge plus admin and telephone costs divided by the number of concierge offices run by HFI multiplied by the number of concierge offices run by the TMO.

Management of Repairs and Maintenance

Management of day to day repairs, pre and post inspection

HFI budget for responsive repairs management, clienting and performance monitoring divided by HFI tenants & leaseholders (weighted to reflect the proportion of the budget allocated to internal works (tenants only) & external works (tenants and leaseholders)) multiplied by TMO tenants.

Management of planned maintenance and major works

Paid as a percentage of the total works cost when works are undertaken.

Repairs call handling in normal hours

HFI cost divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants (weighted to reflect the proportion of the budget

50

Allowance Item Explanation

allocated to internal works (tenants only) & external works (tenants and leaseholders)) multiplied by TMO tenants

Repairs call handling out of hours by HFI

HFI cost divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants (weighted to reflect the proportion of the budget allocated to internal works (tenants only) & external works (tenants and leaseholders)) multiplied by TMO tenants

Repairs call handling out of hours by Contact Islington

Cost charged to HFI by Contact Islington divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants (weighted to reflect the proportion of the budget allocated to internal works (tenants only) & external works (tenants and leaseholders)) multiplied by TMO tenants.

Collecting rents

Collection of rents, service charges and miscellaneous debts from tenants

98% of HFI cost divided by HFI tenants and TMO tenants multiplied by TMO tenants.

Notification of rents and service charges to tenants

2% of HFI cost divided by HFI tenants and TMO tenants multiplied by TMO tenants.

Control of rent arrears

Option A or B: None No allowance paid.

Option C: up to passing serious cases to HFI

70% of cost of HFI rent arrears staff divided by HFI tenants and TMO tenants multiplied by TMO tenants.

Option D: up to and including seeking possession

75% of cost of HFI rent arrears staff divided by HFI tenants and TMO tenants multiplied by TMO tenants.

Option E: taking full responsibility

100% of cost of HFI court officers staff divided by HFI tenants and TMO tenants multiplied by TMO tenants.

Collection of rents, service charges arrears and miscellaneous debts from former tenants

100% of cost of HFI former tenant arrears staff divided by HFI tenants and TMO tenants multiplied by TMO tenants.

Leaseholder Service Charges

Setting service charges No TMO has this responsibility

Billing, collection, arrears No TMO has this responsibility

Finance

Accountancy HFI cost times percentage of HFI staff engaged in TMO work divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants

51

52

Allowance Item Explanation

multiplied by TMO tenants.

Audit £3000 fixed sum per TMO.

Banking HFI cost of banking charges times percentage of HFI staff engaged in TMO work divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Giro Charges Cost to HFI divided by HFI tenants, leaseholders, all TMO tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Pay Point Cost to HFI divided by HFI tenants, leaseholders, all TMO tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Tenancy Management

Management of void dwellings

60% of HFI cost of managing and letting voids divided by HFI tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Selection of tenants 40% of HFI cost of managing and letting voids divided by HFI tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Tenancy Management without full ASB management

10% of HFI tenancy management cost divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Full ASB management No TMO has this responsibility

Other management costs

Payroll Cost charged to HFI times percentage of HFI staff engaged in TMO work divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Recruitment HFI budget times percentage of HFI staff engaged in TMO work divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Senior Management Team (HFI Directors)

HFI budget for the senior management team times percentage of HFI staff engaged in TMO work divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Area housing managers

HFI budget for area housing managers times percentage of HFI area housing office staff engaged in TMO work divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Community and Service Development - Area offices

HFI budget for Community and Service Development staff divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Learning and development HFI budget for Learning and Development times

53

Allowance Item Explanation

percentage of HFI staff engaged in TMO work divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Human Resources HFI budget for Human Resources times percentage of HFI staff engaged in TMO work divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Computer maintenance/help desk/ TSG

Cost charged to HFI by LBI times percentage of HFI staff engaged in TMO work divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Electricity HFI electricity budget for area offices divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Gas HFI gas budget for area offices divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Running costs of area housing offices

HFI running costs (stationery, telephone, etc) budget for area offices divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Other service costs

Translation and Interpretation

HFI budget divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Service Development 30% of HFI budget for Service Development Team divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Customer Services without garage management

80% of HFI budget for customer services staff divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Garage management 20% of HFI budget for customer services staff divided by HFI leaseholders and tenants multiplied by TMO tenants

Administration allowance

Committee administration £5,000 plus £10 per property

Percentage of staff engaged in TMO work

The number of HFI staff carrying out services that TMOs provide divided by the total number of HFI staff multiplied by 100.

TMOs and TMCs in Islington.doc

54

Appendix G Sample Internal Audit report

London Borough of Islington - Internal Audit Report

Executive Summary Department: Homes For Islington

Audit Owner: Trish Hayes

Distribution List: : David

Selo, Anthony Jonas, Trish

Hayes, Stacey Wright

Date of last review: October 06

Overall Opinion

Substantial Assurance

Reasonable Assurance

Limited Assurance

No Assurance

Direction of Travel – No Improvement

A review of the XXX TMO was completed as part of the 2009/10 Internal Audit Programme. This received a limited assurance opinion.

System control issues identified

High

Medium

Low

Non-compliance with controls identified

High

Medium

Low

Scope of the Review:

This audit has focused on the adequacy of administrative and financial controls ensuring that the Tenant Management Organisation (TMO) is complying with the terms of the Management Agreement and best financial practice. The recommendations of the last review were also followed up

TMOs and TMCs in Islington.doc

55

Key messages A number of weaknesses were noted at the TMO and the recommendations agreed in the last audit in 2006 have on the whole not been implemented. However, it should be noted that at the time of the audit the present manager had been in post for only five weeks. The following weaknesses were identified : - Invoices did not always have authorised signatures on them to evidence that they had been approved for payment .In one instance, payment was made against a statement . Incomplete records were maintained relating to bicycle parking income received which prevented audit from ensuring that all income received had been accounted for. It was not clear whether income had been banked intact or paid into petty cash float and used to fund petty cash payments. Petty cash is not reconciled regularly and the petty cash vouchers are not numbered or authorised. The TMO does not have any formal staffing procedures or anti fraud policy. A Hospitality and Gifts register is not maintained Annual register of business statement s had not been signed by staff and some members. A Dell laptop was noted as missing from the inventory record and the TMO had not reported this to obtain a crime reference number to pursue an insurance claim. There are no committee approved expenditure limits set out.

3

Basis of our opinion and assurance statement

Risk rating Assessment rationale

High

Control weakness that has or is likely to have a significant impact upon the achievement of key system, function or process objectives.

This weakness may have a significant impact on the achievement of the overall organisational objectives.

Medium Control weakness that has a low impact on the achievement of the key system, function or process objectives; or

High priority controls or non-compliance issues identified

Medium priority controls or non-compliance issues identified

Low priority controls or non-compliance issues identified

No controls Issues identified

Each of the objectives for this review are shown as segments of the wheel. The key to the colours on the wheel are as follows:

Governance

Business Interests

Income & Expenditure

Balance Sheet (Assets )

TMOs and TMCs in Islington.doc

This weakness has exposed the system, function or process to a key risk, however the likelihood of this risk occurring is low.

Low

Control weakness that does not impact upon the achievement of key system, function or process objectives; however implementation of the recommendation would improve overall control.

Level of assurance

Description

Substantial

Our review did not identify any weaknesses that would impact on the achievement of the key system, function or process objectives. Therefore we can conclude that key controls have been adequately designed and are operating effectively to deliver the key objectives of the system, function or process.

As a result, a high level of assurance can be given on the adequacy and operating effectiveness of controls in place at the time of our audit.

Reasonable

There are some weaknesses in the design and/or operation of controls; however the likely impact of these weaknesses on the achievement of the key system, function or process objectives is not expected to be significant. Furthermore, these weaknesses are unlikely to impact upon the achievement of organisational objectives.

As a result, moderate assurance can be given on the adequacy and operating effectiveness of controls in place at the time of our audit.

Limited

There are weaknesses in the design and / or operation of controls which could have a significant impact on the achievement of the key system, function or process objectives which may also have a significant impact on the achievement of organisational objectives.

We are therefore able to give limited assurance on the adequacy and operating effectiveness of controls in place.

No Assurance

There are weaknesses in the design and/or operation of controls which not only have a significant impact on the achievement of key system, function or process objectives but may put at risk the achievement of organisation objectives. As a result, no assurance can be given on the adequacy and operating effectiveness of controls in place.

Detailed Findings Recommendations and Action Plan

Matters Arising Potential Risk Implications

Recommendations Priority Type Management Response and agreed actions

Income and Expenditure 1.1 In 5 cases the invoices had not

been authorised for payment

There can be no assurance that the expenditure is approved

All invoices should be examined and authorised by a designated officer

High

Specific Action to be taken: All invoices to be authorised & signed Responsible Officer: Manager

56

TMOs and TMCs in Islington.doc

Target Date: Completed

1.2 Payment was made on a statement in one case.

This can lead to duplicate payments

Payment should only be made on receipt of a proper invoice

Medium

Specific Action to be taken: All payments must have supporting paperwork /proper authorisation should be given and noted. Responsible Officer: Manager/C Target Date: Completed

1.3 The income from the bicycle parking is paid into the petty cash

Income/expenditure can not be properly accounted for

Income received should not be used to make payments

High

Specific Action to be taken:

Procedure should be establish and agreed Responsible Officer: Manager Target Date: 01/12/10 Complete

1.4 The records maintained for bicycle income were not clear as to when the income was

received/banked or paid into the petty cash

There is no clear audit trail to account for income received.

Records maintained should show the income collection date and date the income is banked.

Medium

Specific Action to be taken: New Bank account to be opened solely for purpose of bike sheds – adopted and agreed Responsible Officer:Manager Target Date: 1/12/10

1.5 There is no set amount of float held and the reconciling of cash is not undertaken regularly.

There is limited assurance that all cash is properly accounted for

A float amount should be set to cover the level of expenditure. The cash should be reconciled regularly to this float and cash reimbursed for expenditure incurred.

High

Specific Action to be taken:

Correct Policy procedure agreed & adopt Responsible Officer: Manager Target Date: completed

1.7

There was no approved expenditure

Staff could authorise unlimited amounts of

Committee approval should be available at the TMO outing

Medium

Specific Action to be taken: Follow financial procedures MMA.

57

TMOs and TMCs in Islington.doc

58

levels for staff or the committee

expenditure expenditure levels designated officer/s can authorised

All financial matters to be reported at committee meetings. Responsible Committee Target Date: Completed

Governance 1.8 A Gifts and Hospitality register

is not maintained.

The absence of this record does not demonstrate an open and transparent approach to the governance of the TMO.

The TMO should have a Gifts and Hospitality register.

Medium

Specific Action to be taken: Keep a diary or computer file for record purposes Responsible Officer: Manager/C Target Date Completed

1.9 Grievance and disciplinary

Procedures do not exist at the TMO

Staff may remain unaware of these procedures

Staff should be made aware of the procedures

Medium

Specific

Action to be taken:

Adopt & agree procedure and provide staff with copy.

Target date Completed

1.10 The Anti- fraud policy is not in place.

Incorrect action may be taken following reporting/detection of fraud.

The Chair/Manager should liaise with the TMO Team with the view to adopting the Council anti-fraud policy.

Medium

Specific Action to be taken: Policy should be adopted and agreed

Responsible Officer:

Manager/Committee

Target Date: Completed

Contracting Arrangements 1.11 Staff do not sign the code of

conduct register

There is a risk that potential conflicts of interests may not be identified. This leaves the TMO exposed to criticisms of patronizing favoured suppliers

Staff members should sign the code of conduct register and all members/staff should sign the conflict of interests register .Entries should be updated annually.

Medium

Specific

Action to be taken:

Statement of register of interest and code of conduct should be signed by all committee members

Responsible Officer:

TMOs and TMCs in Islington.doc

59

Manager/Committee

Target Date:

Completed

1.12

A Dell computer laptop was noted as missing and the TMO had not obtained a crime reference number in order to pursue an insurance claim.

Valuable assets of the TMO are lost.

The TMO should make an insurance claim promptly to replace the missing asset.

Medium

Specific

Action to be taken

Make a claim from the insurance

Responsible Officer

Manager

Target :

30/06/10 (Manager in the process of finding solution)