Sheila Tolley: Having one body for inspections means consistency.
The driving force has to be what delivers the greatest level of improvement. If there's going to be a lot of time and effort spent on creating a body then I think we need to stand back, go back to basics, and make sure we're clear on what it's all about.
Martin Palmer: Housing doesn't sit in a vacuum and needs to be integrated into other agendas such as regeneration and sustainability. On that basis we support the proposal to create a single housing inspectorate, but whereas the "what" is a strong case, the "who" is a secondary argument, less important.
Tony Redmond: The new structure needs to have some clear parameters and to show how separate it may be from other areas. Joint working is part and parcel of what we do.
There's a need to reinforce the importance of expertise, knowledge and experience in each service being inspected which must not be lost in the pursuit of a unified body.
Bill Murphey: For me, the test has to be what will give the greatest added value to local government. There's a whole range of different types of bodies running different services, so we will have to develop inspection regimes that reflect that diversity of structure.
We need to move from analysis to doing something. We know pretty much what the problems are; we need to convert some inspectorate resources to support services, not how we reorganise the inspection service.
MP: I would differ, in terms of what you're saying about not needing more inspection. Inspection is only part of the work we do with authorities and we provide a lot of support-type work across a broad area. There is both a need and demand for this support and this is likely to continue.
How well do you see a single housing inspectorate fitting into the government's inspection and regulatory role?
TR: The regulatory and inspection role in government departments clearly has an important role in terms of overseeing the sector and that should complement the unified inspection role. It's particularly relevant in education, health and social services.
BM: The government has a heavy regulatory function – not just passing legislation – and a lot of responsibility. You've almost got to second-guess what it's doing.
MP: In any debate about a single inspectorate we need to ensure that the result is better housing services for the community. Housing is not a pure entity in an ivory tower and it has to be integrated. The integration of government regulation makes sense within that framework.
What makes the perfect inspector?
In any debate about a single inspectorate, we must make sure the result is better housing services for the community
Martin Palmer, Audit Commission
ST: You get a better response if you've got the right people on the inspection team. That's key. We took huge time and effort to make sure we had the right people, the skills, knowledge, experience, the soft qualities, interpersonal skills. The majority of our inspectors are practitioners.
MP: We're looking for people who are committed to public services and want them to improve. We don't want anybody who wants to use what is, after all, a powerful position to truck into an organistion, pass judgment and just go away. It's about building relationships.
Because we've all been practitioners it's easy to identify with other people's problems. The skill is to be able to step back and also to be diplomatic when you have to say things like "I know you're trying hard, but it hasn't worked". Inspection is not a science, it's an art. People skills are hugely important because the wrong word at the wrong time could be disastrous. The inspectors have developed considerably their ability to understand organisations and how services are delivered. Although they have the relevant technical knowledge and background, they do understand what works from the customers' point of view.
TR: A lot of work we do in the regulatory and inspection field depends upon the quality of staff in the field – their skills, training and support in particular. In inspection, the balance of the team is a vital ingredient of success and the inclusion of professionals, academics and practitioners may be good practice. Authorities are much more receptive to practitioners who can talk the authority's language and have "been there".
BM: I'd agree about practitioners being taken more seriously. People – chief executives who have been on the receiving end of a peer review – have said to us that it's very scary having feedback from another chief executive.
What strikes me about the peer review process is the learning that goes on with the team itself. You spend an entire week just thinking about best practice and not a week goes by without people in teams saying "gosh, we don't do this in our authority". Sometimes we find in peer reviews that services are hidden. I wonder if a service-specific inspectorate raises the profile of that service?
ST: The role of an inspector is to be a bit of a diplomat too.
TR: I'd definitely agree with that. The ombudsman has the power to subpoena if there's no cooperation, but you don't want to do that. You find ways of cajoling. You don't force it. It's definitely about establishing good relationships.
ST: We go in for a short period and within that time you've got to develop a relationship with people – but at the same time stand back as well. It's only when you totally step aside at the end of the inspection that you can see things as they are; but you have to consider all sorts of dilemmas and contradictions before you make your final assessment.
MP: You do. Because we've all been practitioners, it's easy to identify with other people's problems so as well as stepping back you've got to be a diplomat and say "I know you're trying hard but it hasn't worked".
BM: In any authority there's 1000 things they could do and only five or six they're capable of doing in reality. The key thing is to ask "what's useful for this authority in this context?" and sometimes that's difficult. You don't want to say something that's damaging. For example, a newly hung council where relations with the cabinet are a mess, but they are trying; the last thing anyone should say to them is "your relationships are dreadful".
With our peer reviews, you go in and in about two hours you've made a judgment that you keep to yourself and 95% of the time you're right. Intuition is enormously helpful.
Inspections are based, in part, on judgments that are not wholly evidence-based. The feel of what the authority is about is very important
Tony Redmond, Local Government Ombudsman
But if someone is negative about the authority, I become more positive as a challenging mechanism.
MP: I am sure that we have all experienced waiting for a job interview where within half an hour of sitting in reception you have an impression of what that organisation is like and it's usually right. But you can't write an inspection report on the basis of that kind of impression.
Every day we tell the authority in writing what we found the previous day. Effectively we are saying to the authority "this is what it is looking like to us; this is your opportunity to come back to us if you think we're wrong". In most cases, authorities agree with our findings as a fair reflection of their service.
This helps to avoid any surprises at the end of the inspection, and where there are negative messages to be given it allows the authority to engage with us over this during the inspection. It's being open about what we find.
TR: Inspections are evidence-based but the feel or sense of what the authority is about is very important. Sometimes a conclusion may be reached on the balance of probabilities. Inspections are based, in part, on judgments that are not wholly evidence-based. This is quite legitimate but it is a skill inspectors need in taking a view on what is appropriate given what has been learned.
MP: There is a developmental process in inspectors themselves. We're not looking for technocrats. It's that sort of feel and intuition of what makes things work, the focus from the customers' point of view.
How are inspection teams received by the people they have come to review?
ST: Initially there's some nervousness about the team's arrival. We address this right at the start with a series of pre-inspection visits.
This might include a stock tour with some of the staff to get a contextual setting so our team doesn't go into the inspection cold. We try to do some informal presentation to staff as well so that by the time we arrive for the inspection, people have seen us and know who's who.
That's not to say there isn't nervousness even though we do that, but, by and large, people can be incredibly open. On the whole I'd say we get a positive response.
BM: We've done 130-odd peer reviews now and it's interesting because even in those authorities where you uncover problems, once they've got over that barrier they want to move on. We've not found a single authority that doesn't want to move on, although some of them are more competent than others at doing that. Some are better at asking for help they need. There's no uniform response. Some people might say "am I really that bad?"
MP: It's quite understandable that people are apprehensive before an inspection. As an inspector you're in a privileged position in that you walk into an organisation and have free rein to look at all the services, all their documents, talk to all the customers and then write a public report about it. It's not surprising there's some nervousness.
I’ve lived in housing association properties myself so I know what it’s like to be on the receiving end
Sheila Tolley, Housing Corporation
We often find that people have checked into the backgrounds of the inspection team before we get there and have talked to their peers about us. You're inspected before you inspect and there's nothing wrong with that.
One thing I've found is that people have a thirst for more contact with us following an inspection. They realise what the inspection brings, it's a powerful tool for change in an organisation. We always preach the gospel of added value through inspection and look to see what added value a particular inspection will bring: it can take many forms.
Is it difficult dealing with the age-old tension between officers and members in local government?
BM: I think the relationship between officers and members is an interesting dilemma in inspections. At one level you want and need members to be intensely loyal to their council and so they feel part of a team, but on the other level the members are guardians of the public interest and they need to be challenging.
In a sense they should be asking the same questions the inspectors are asking. They have a delicate role between developing good working relationships with officers and members and being a little bit critical.
TR: I think member-officer relations are better than some people suggest. There is sometimes talk of difficulties often leading to disharmony, but I think in practice it's not normally like that. Within a democratic process, of course, there'll be tensions but healthy ones.
When it comes to inspections I would expect members to have their own views of performance which might, in some cases, be different from that of officers.
MP: I think relations are pretty good and it's a rarity where relations have really broken down. It's part of the skill in the inspection process to recognise the way things are working and, where there are problems, to understand the nature of those problems because that helps you find the solution.
What's the best thing about being an inspector?
ST: The tenant focus groups. Talking to customers about it is also one of the best aspects of the job.
I've lived in housing association properties myself and know what it's like to be on the receiving end. It's about improving the sector for the user.
MP: The same is true for my team, that's their motivation.
Martin Palmer
Palmer is a former deputy chief executive of London registered social landlord Servite Houses, a former housing officer for Redditch council and a former housing adviser in Hammersmith council’s housing aid centre, west London.
Tony Redmond
Redmond is also deputy director of Wigan council in Greater Manchester, chief executive of Knowsley council in Merseyside and chief executive of the London borough of Harrow.
Sheila Tolley
Tolley led community involvement initiatives at North British Housing Association, where she worked on the Hulme City Challenge project, and was responsible for pioneering a number of community involvement initiatives. The project was submitted to the United Nations as one of the UK’s best practice examples.
Bill Murphy
Murphy is former deputy director of Greenwich council and head of training at the London borough of Newham.
Source
Housing Today
No comments yet