The purpose of this report is to provide information on the outcome of
the Equality Impact Assessment of the impact of the proposed changes
to the Your Choice Your Home scheme and agree changes to the
scheme.
1.0
Introduction
1.1
At the Operational Group meeting of 30 April 2010 it was agreed that
an Equality Impact Assessment would be carried out before any
decision was made as to whether the Your Choice Your Home scheme
would move to a weekly bid cycle.
1.2
A move to a weekly bid cycle would mean that applicants would have 7
days to bid for a property rather than the current 10 days and
properties would be advertised every 7 days rather than the current 14
day cycle. This would allow properties to be advertised more promptly,
as at the moment there can be a maximum 14 day wait until the next
bid cycle opens for bids once the advert deadline has closed. There
are also implications for the Council in that a 7 day weekly bid cycle will
mean that checking adverts and bidding for applicants will now have to
take place in the same week and not separate weeks. There are also
implications for customers who bid by coupon and receive Personal
Property Lists. This report explores these issues in more detail as well
as considering the impact of stopping the sending of Personal Property
Lists. Finally it sets out a number of options for moving forward.
2.0
Equality Impact Assessment
2.1
As around 89% of all applicants bid online, the Equality Impact
Assessment needed to be targeted as any survey which looked at the
impact on all applicants of a change in the bid cycle or stopping to send
Personal Property Lists would mean that the particular issues around
the accessibility of the scheme and impact of changes on vulnerable
applicants would be hidden or their impact lessened. The Equality
Impact Assessment process therefore concentrated on applicants
bidding by coupon and also vulnerable applicants i.e. those that
receive the Property Lists, those who have a support worker who bids
on their behalf, those who North Norfolk District Council bids for,
applicants whose first spoken language is not English and those who
need an adapted property or use a wheelchair, to identify what the
impact of a weekly bid cycle would be.
2.2
Coupon Users
2.2.1 Around 1.5% of bids are made by coupon every bid cycle, this
represents around 10-17 people using coupons to make a bid per
cycle. As the coupon needs to be posted to Locata before the bid
deadline date for the bid to be logged, a reduced bidding cycle would
impact on coupon users. An analysis of applicants who bid by coupon
during cycles 32 and 33 was therefore undertaken to understand their
characteristics.
2.2.2 22 applicants bid for properties using coupons in the 2 bid cycles, of
these only 5 applicants bid in both of the bid cycles. 8 of the applicants
were over 65 whilst only 1 was under 25, the remaining applicants
were aged 40 to 64. 13 of the applicants were single whilst 6 were
couples, the remaining applicants were families. This showed that
applicants bidding by coupon are typically older single people or
couples.
2.2.3 17 of the 22 applicants receive Personal Property Lists – which will be
mainly as they are classed as vulnerable to their age (any applicant
aged over 60 who states they need adverts is sent them). 2 of the 22
applicants stated that they needed an adapted property and none use
a wheelchair.
2.2.4 Half of the 22 applicants did not live in North Norfolk and of these 11
applicants only 3 had a connection to North Norfolk.
2.2.5 Generally this showed that the characteristics of coupon users were
not indicative of any particular vulnerability other than age which is not
necessarily a vulnerability. The small numbers of bidders by coupon
allows the option of contacting them to discuss alternative bid methods
so that they would not be disadvantaged by any change in the bid cycle
and removal of coupons as a bid method.
2.3
Assessing the impact on vulnerable applicants
2.3.1
It was decided that a 2 stage phone survey would be used to assess
the impact of changes on vulnerable applicants. Stage 1 involved
contacting the support workers of applicants who had stated that a
support worker would bid on their behalf. Stage 2 involved contacting
a random sample of applicants identified as vulnerable (see paragraph
2.1 above).
2.4
2.4.1
Stage 1 Survey
80 applicants have stated that they have a support worker who bids on
their behalf, of these some stated that the support worker was a family
member or friend and these were excluded from the survey. A
proforma was used to ensure that the phonecalls to support workers
would identify:

Whether they were still supporting the applicant

Whether they were aware that the applicant had stated they would
bid on their behalf

Whether they were aware how to bid

Whether they were working within a support plan to support the
applicants to be able to bid for themselves in the future


How they identified what properties to bid for and how they bid for
properties
Whether there would be an impact on them if the bid cycle was
changed.
2.4.2
The survey identified that some applicants had moved and the Council
had not been informed. In the majority of cases however, the support
worker was no longer supporting the applicant (support no longer
wanted, needed or applicant has moved) and the Council had not been
informed. In other cases the applicant is still being supported generally
but bids independently. In a small number of cases support was no
longer being provided but the Council was bidding on behalf of the
applicant instead.
2.4.3
As the majority of support workers were no longer supporting
applicants, it was not possible to identify what the impact of the change
to the bid cycle would be on them.
2.5
2.5.1
.
2.5.2
Stage 2 Survey
Two proformas were developed to structure and record the
discussions with applicants. One proforma was designed for
applicants where bids have been made (either by the applicant, the
Council or support worker) and the other for where no bids have been
made. A random sample of each type of vulnerable applicant was
contacted. As part of the survey the removal of coupons was
discussed if that method of bidding was used by the applicant and also
the impact if Personal Property Lists were no longer sent to the
applicant if they currently received them. The proforma was designed
to discover:

Whether the applicant was aware of how the Your Choice Your
Home scheme works

Whether they check the Personal Property List they are sent (if
they are sent them)

Whether they would be affected if they were no longer sent a
Personal Property List

Whether they have enough time to bid under current
arrangements

How they would be affected if the time to bid was 7 days instead
of 10 and properties were advertised weekly.
For those applicants who North Norfolk District Council bids for the
survey showed that applicants were happy with the arrangement that
the Council bids for them and were therefore unconcerned at a
possible change to the bid cycle. In terms of the Personal Property
Lists these were liked as a way of seeing whether the Council would be
making a bid for them in that cycle and what was available. Receiving
Personal Property Lists did not encourage them to bid for themselves.
2.5.3 For those applicants whose first spoken language was not English,
again a number had moved and had not notified the Council. There
was a mixed level of understanding of the scheme. 1 respondent had
not been bidding as they did not understand the scheme so it was not
possible to discuss the changes with them. Others were actively
bidding using the internet and stated that a change to the bid cycle
would not affect them.
2.5.4 For those applicants who require an adapted property or use a
wheelchair, once again a number had moved and not notified the
Council. Overall the view was that they would not be affected by a
change to the bid cycle. If they received Personal Property Lists they
still wanted to receive them even if they had internet access.
2.5.5 Whilst the Stage 2 Survey is not yet complete it shows that applicants
considered to be vulnerable should not be adversely affected by a
change to a weekly cycle. Where some more vulnerable households
might be adversely affected, other support mechanisms such as a
support worker or the Council bidding on their behalf would remedy
this. Other applicants need support to understand the scheme and
how to bid and once provided with support will be able to bid
independently. A move to a weekly bid cycle maybe simpler for many
applicants to understand as properties will be advertised every week.
2.5.6 The majority of applicants like receiving the Personal Property Lists
and would not like their removal, however, it is clear that where the
Council bids on an applicants behalf, the Personal Property List is not
being used as a way of considering whether they could be rehoused
more quickly if they considered other property types or locations or to
bid independently. Instead they are in effect a way to check whether a
property of the type and location they want has been advertised. In
other cases, a Personal Property List is still required by the applicant
even though they have internet access and bid independently.
Personal Property Lists represent a significant cost to the scheme, and
are time intensive to send out, but their value to the applicants is
unclear other than as a source of reassurance. The telephone service
which allows applicants to ring up and hear what properties are being
advertised can also provide reassurance in the same way as Personal
Property Lists.
3.0
Impact of change to bid cycle on North Norfolk District Council
3.1
Whilst the Locata system is automated and Housing Association
Partners create their own adverts and shortlist and let properties on the
system, the Council also has a role, it:

Checks adverts prior to properties being advertised and approves
the Property List prior to it being placed on the website

Prints and sends out Personal Property Lists to 327 applicants
(these are hand folded and manually placed in envelopes as the




size of each Personal Property List varies between applicants
depending on the properties they are eligible for)
Sends out Property Lists to libraries and other stakeholder
organisations
Bids on behalf of 205 applicants, whilst not all applicants will have
a bid made as there will not be properties of their requested type
or in their area of choice all applicants have to be checked to see
if a bid can be made
Advertise properties on Exception Housing Schemes or on behalf
of Housing Associations who use the scheme on a Pay As You
Go Basis
Shortlist, provide nominations and let properties on Locata where
the Council has advertised the property.
3.2
In the current 14 day bid cycle, the Council creates any adverts it
needs to make and checks adverts created by Housing Association
Partners during the week leading up to the Thursday lunchtime advert
deadline, discusses possible changes with the Housing Association
who created the advert and signs off the property list on the Thursday
prior to bidding. On the Thursday afternoon/Friday morning the
Personal Property Lists are printed and prepared for posting on Friday
afternoon. On the Thursday afternoon the dedicated telephone advert
information is updated with details of properties available to bid for from
9am the Friday morning.
3.3
Depending on how quickly the Personal Property Lists can be made
ready for posting, bidding on behalf of applicants starts on the Friday
afternoon and is completed during the Wednesday, Thursday and
Friday of the following week. On the following Monday morning prior to
bidding closing a final check is made to ensure any application set to
live since the bidding was completed who the Council needs to bid for
is checked to see if any suitable properties for that applicants have
been advertised. The printing, placing into envelopes and posting of
Personal Property Lists and bidding (other than on the Monday
morning) and updating the phone advert information is done by one
member of staff who works 19 hours over Wednesday, Thursday and
Friday. Overall this post holder spends around 2 days on these tasks.
3.4
A move to a weekly bid cycle would mean that all the work currently
carried out over a 2 week period would need to be completed within a
week, and for the post holder who does the printing and posting of
Personal Property Lists and bidding within the same 3 days that the
post holder works. This would put pressure on the Council’s resources
as it would mean that the post holder would not be able to do the other
work they normally do as they would have to be solely working on
Choice Based Lettings for 4 out of the 6 days they work over a 2 week
period, rather than the current 2 out of 6 days. There is no other
capacity within the team to take on this work and additional staff can
not be employed from the Council’s resources to take on this additional
work.
4.0
Moving forward to a weekly bid cycle
4.1
The implications of a weekly bid cycle mean that coupons will no longer
be able to used as a bid method as the applicants will not have
sufficient time to bid by this method.
4.2
A decision needs to be made whether Personal Property Lists are still
sent. Now that Personal Property Lists are printed in black and white
the cost of printing and posting these has reduced to around £117 per
bid cycle. With a weekly cycle the cost of printing the Personal
Property Lists will increase significantly and may double, the cost of
printing the Personal Property Lists this year was £4438.15. For this
year, postage costs are £2302.75 and this would double to £4605.50
(although this does not include the increase in postal costs from 4 April
2011).
4.3
There will be a cost for Locata to amend the system to accommodate
the bid cycle, the exact cost of this work is not known, but is likely to be
at least £600 plus VAT. Locata will require 2 months notice to make
the change and allow for the change to be tested.
4.4
Based on changing to a weekly bid cycle with effect from 2 September
the following events need to occur by the following timescales:

Decision on when bidding will open and close (April/May 2011).

Get agreement of Operational Group to change bid cycle to a
weekly cycle, stop use of coupon bidding and decision on sending
of Personal Property Lists (by 9 May 2011).

Get agreement of the Partnership Board to change the bid cycle,
stop use of coupons and decision on sending of Personal
Property Lists (by 18 May 2011).

North Norfolk District Council Cabinet approval of revised Choice
Based Lettings Policy (7 June 2011)

Advise Locata of changes to bidding cycle as well as text changes
for website, Scheme User Guide and welcome letter (by 1 July
2011).

Send out newsletter to all applicants and stakeholders which
details proposed changes (by mid August).
If the date for the change to a weekly cycle is not to be 2 September
2011, the timescales above would change, however, 2 September
2011 is considered to be the earliest date that the change could be
implemented from.
4.5
The timescale and action list at 4.4 does not include any changes or
publicity that may be needed to reflect the introduction from July 2011
of properties let with the new Affordable Rent or properties from April
2012 let on the new flexible tenancy.
5.0
Options
5.1
Option 1: No Change to Bid Cycle, No Personal Property Lists
sent
5.1.1 This option will have no cost, but will offer a saving to the scheme of at
least £3000 per year with the removal of Personal Property Lists.
There will also be a saving of half a day’s staff resource which equates
to a saving of £4724.72 per annum to the Council (if treated as a cash
saving) due to the reduction in administration work.
5.2
Option 2: No Change to Bid Cycle, Personal Property Lists still
sent
5.2.1 This option will have no cost and will offer no savings to the scheme.
5.3
Option 3: Weekly Bid Cycle, No Personal Property Lists sent
5.3.1 This option will have a one off cost of at least £600 to reconfigure the
scheme to a weekly bid cycle. Savings of at least £3000 a year will be
made as Personal Property List will no longer be sent. The loss of a
half day on current staff requirements as Personal Property Lists will
not be sent does not compensate for the increase of a day and half
additional work caused by the change to a weekly bid cycle. Overall
this means that the impact on the Council is an additional day of work
for one member of staff at a cost of £9449.44 per annum.
5.4
Option 4: Weekly Bid Cycle, Personal Property Lists still sent
5.4.1 This option will have a one off cost of at least £600 to reconfigure the
scheme to a weekly bid cycle. Scheme costs will increase to at least
£6000 a year for printing and postage costs for Personal Property Lists.
There will be a day per week increase in the number of days required
to be spent by North Norfolk District Council in administrating the
scheme to 4 out of 6 days being spent by one staff member on the
scheme, this equates to an additional cost of £18,898.88 per annum.
5.5
Commentary on options.
5.5.1 North Norfolk District Council is unable to increase the resources it has
to administer the Your Choice Your Home scheme as described in 3.1
to 3.3 above and should actually be looking for further efficiencies and
savings in the running of the scheme and would therefore want to stop
the sending of Personal Property Lists. If it is decided that Options 2, 3
or 4 are to be pursued, the Housing Association Partners will have to
be asked to cover the Council’s administration costs for sending out
Personal Property Lists and the cost of printing and posting these.
Furthermore if a change to a weekly bid cycle is agreed, the Council’s
increased administration costs will also have to be met by the Housing
Association Partners as the Council can not resource these costs.
6.0
Conclusion
6.1
Moving to a weekly bid cycle will have some impact on vulnerable
applicants but this is considered to be minimal and can be mitigated
through existing support options such as the Council bidding on their
behalf. Additionally a weekly bid cycle may be simpler for some
applicants to understand as there is always a bid cycle opening and
closing each week.
6.2
A weekly bid cycle would have a significant effect on the Council’s
ability to administer the scheme particularly if Personal Property Lists
were still being sent to those applicants who require them. There is
also a cost to reconfigure the scheme which will have to be shared by
the scheme partners.
6.3
Removing the option of bidding by coupon would only affect existing
applicants who bid using this method. New applicants would not be
aware that this option was previously available. There are 3 alternative
ways of bidding and support will be provided where required to help
coupon users to use other bidding methods.
6.4
Stopping the sending of Personal Property Lists (which are now printed
in black and white at a reduced cost to the scheme) will create a saving
to the scheme of around £3000 per year. It is not clear what value the
sending of Personal Property Lists has to applicants.
7.0
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Operational Group:
1.
Agrees which option to pursue.
If option 3 or 4 is agreed, it is recommended that the Operational
Group:
2.
Recommends Option 3 or 4 (as appropriate) to the Partnership
Board for adoption with effect from 2 September 2011.