Sector slates two new operating cost indices as ‘useless’ and likely to cause ‘enormous harm’

The two indices cover specialist and non-specialist organisations and figures are given with and without scores for repairs. In all, 504 associations are covered – more than twice the number in a pilot scheme back in August (HT 27 August 2004, page 7).

This time round, associations are listed alphabetically and not ranked according to their scores. But associations were individually informed of their placings before Christmas.

The five highest- and lowest-scoring associations – both specialist and non-specialist – are all new inclusions and did not figure in the efficiency index in August.

On the new list, the highest scoring non-specialists are Agudas Israel Housing Association, followed by Ability Housing Association and Elim Housing Association. Enabling Partnership, Brighton Housing Trust and The Papworth Trust came bottom.

At both ends of the scale there has been strong criticism of the indices, which many believe still make unfair comparisons between landlords.

Andy Winter, Brighton Housing Trust chief executive, said: “Of course we do badly in an index like this. We have 292 homes and don’t enjoy the economies of scale of other associations we’re being compared with.”

He added: “Quality of service is not assessed. This index can do enormous harm.”

Dave Bebb, chief executive of Liverpool Housing Trust, number 302 on the list, said: “We recognise and endorse the drive to increase efficiency. This index doesn’t take us there. In its current form it’s useless.”

And Alistair Allender, chief executive of Elim, which came third, said: “We are hugely pleased but every association is different and there could be 20 reasons why one association is better or worse than another.”

But Peter Dixon, chairman of the Housing Corporation, defended the indices. He said they “provide material for associations’ own enquiries into their performance and opportunities for improvement”.

He added: “We believe that the publication of these indices, alongside the 2004 performance indicators, will help associations and ourselves to focus on the right issues.”

Clare Miller, director of regulation for the corporation, said concerns voiced after the pilot had persuaded the corporation to avoid public rankings this time round.

She said: “We hope that the associations will look at their results and look at the results of other associations they regard as their peers so they can look at and understand how the comparisons work.”