|
Review Name |
Anti-Social Behaviour Review Recommendations Report |
|
Directorate/Service |
Housing |
|
Review Recommendations Report Author |
Joe Williams (Performance & Improvement Officer) |
|
Date |
25.04.2022 |
|
Senior Responsible Owner/ Project Executive |
Justine Harris (Head of Tenancy Services) |
|
Project Manager
|
Joe Williams (Performance & Improvement Officer) |
|
Project Group |
Janet Dowdell (Tenancy Services Operations Manager) Annabel Tate (Housing Manager) |
Anti-Social Behaviour Review: Recommendations Report
 |
1. Introduction
1.1 Everyone should feel safe and secure in their home and not suffer from anti-social behaviour, nuisance, or harassment. We will take steps to prevent anti-social behaviour from occurring and where it does occur, we will aim to take swift and effective action to find a lasting solution, whilst supporting the victims of ASB and supporting behaviour change of the perpetrator.
1.2 The response to ASB sits within a legal framework. This shapes policy and procedure and therefore the review and its outcomes. The legislation used to handle cases of ASB is across several different Acts, for example many Housing Acts, the Crime and Policing Act 2014 and guidance, Equalities Act 2010, and Humans Right Act. Any changes as a result of this review will be set within this legal framework.
1.3 Response in respect to handling ASB cases is in conjunction with multiple services, including internal and external teams. such as the police, third sector agencies and community groups. Whilst this review considers how we work collaboratively with partners; it is focused on ASB within the context of Housing and the tenancy management procedures.
2. Background
2.1 Housing received requests from residents via Area Panels to review the ASB policy. It is recognised that anti-social behaviour can be very difficult to resolve and can be a long process for those impacted by it, however, it was pointed out that improvements could be made in the way reports are responded to, action taken by officers and outcome reporting.
2.2 Residents requested the following:
· A full review of the council’s anti-social behaviour policy.
· The setting up of a single point of contact (SPOC) for all reports of anti-social behaviour on council estates that will deal with residents regardless of tenure.
· When victims of anti-social behaviour are being moved, they should be given high enough priority to be able to move quickly.
· Housing Performance indicators reported to Area Panel to include details on: the number of active cases; how many have been successfully resolved in the last quarter; and the average length of time it takes to resolve cases.
3. Review Scope and Aims
3.1 First point of contact: putting victims at the heart of the response
to anti-social behaviour.
· Review the initial screening questions across services to improve consistency in response. Please see Appendix 1 for the five screening questions.
· Include hate crime/ASB question in initial screening.
· Review communication skills within the first point of contact teams. Believing approach. Record all incidents including when the perpetrator is not known.
· Involve ‘experts by experience’ in training programme for staff.
· Reporting lines – all first point of contact staff in Police/Housing/Safer Communities need to know how to refer a case to correct team. Taking the report and not closing the conversation without referral.
· Review referral routes to ensure they are working.
3.2 Communications:
· Review the stats provided within the performance report to Area Panels and align them with the request from residents at Area Panel on case closure reasons and duration of cases.
· Web Pages – review the content, publish the new ASB policy.
· Web Pages – include expectations information. What Housing may be able do to resolve ASB and the limitations.
· Anti-Racist Council - involve community groups in communication around hate and race incidents
· Stonewater (domestic abuse charity)–
3.3 Feedback and satisfaction:
· Specific feedback on reporting hate incidents
· Encourage an increase in satisfaction surveys
· Mystery Shoppers-To test our response. We would use a performance improvement organisation.
3.4 Training:
· Core skills including trauma informed approach.
· Reflective practice within the Tenancy Team
· Training in place for first point of contact on emerging trends – Cuckooing, county lines, modern slavery etc. How to recognise the signs when initial reports are made.
· Communication skills to enable better response to victims and witnesses of ASB and crime
3.5 Policy:
· Review and update ASB Policy in line with current service levels and legislation
· Publish Policy on website
3.6 Review of Tenancy Team resource:
· Explore structure within Tenancy Team – roles and resources required
· Explore options to meet requirements of Victim and Witness standards
· Explore service models elsewhere
3.7 Multi-agency working:
· Identify gaps in service provision
· Identify shared aims
· ASB working group – shared aims and barriers
4. Feedback
|
Tenant Feedback |
|
‘If you have not updated your client, it is like you’ve done nothing at all’. ‘I never speak to the same person, so I have to explain myself each time’ ‘I think to remain impartial, I felt as if the council sided with the other party and believed everything, they said ‘ ‘Support and knowing who to contact if the behaviour escalates’ ‘Take tenancy action against the perpetrator and keep me updated on what action is being taken.’ ‘Communicate about what is being done’
|
|
Staff Feedback |
|
‘Set clear standards of what we can do, and this should include information about what we may not be able to do’ ‘An app would be useful. Reporters feel very despondent when asked to complete diary sheets. This would be much simpler if there was an app and recordings could be made straight into it. It would also give a truer timeline’ ‘Dealing with distressed tenants. Having the skills to treat it as an "open" conversation and avoiding it being "tick boxy".’ ‘Taking the details of someone in distress and then passing on to another team, delaying the process and possibly increasing the distress of customers doesn't always feel customer focused, particularly where the ASB is extreme / immediate’
|
4.1 Tenant Feedback
4.1.1 The review has gathered feedback from tenants in two areas. Firstly, we surveyed tenants who were experiencing ASB or had experienced it within a three-month period. A total of 140 individuals were surveyed. Some were contacted by telephone, and all were sent an online survey. There was a total of 18 responses.
4.1.2 Additionally, we surveyed 36 tenants who had suffered hate related ASB. The response was particularly low for this survey, with only three respondents, one of which skipped all the questions. Please see Appendix 2 for the survey questions.
4.1.3 Common themes from this survey were better communication, more sensitivity when dealing with victims who have mental health issues, being kept updated on progress of case, more clarity on the legal process.
4.1.4 Some of these themes are connected, such as communication, keeping in regular contact with the victim whilst managing expectations. Although we scored quite well in this area of customer satisfaction, we should still strive to improve.
4.1.5 In addition to surveying tenants, we established a Task and Finish Group. This group initially comprised of 13 members, all of whom were tenants. Of those 13 we were able to have meetings with 9 members, both in person and virtually.
4.1.6 The first round of meetings was to give background information on the review and current progress and to present findings on the feedback to date. We then had discussions to get their thoughts on ASB, specifically in relation to the aims of the review.
4.1.7 Communications was regularly mentioned, with comments on updating tenants with the progress of the case, even if there was no progress, they felt a conversation with the tenant would go a long way.
4.1.8 One issue raised was how long it took for police to provide information to the council and that during this period the tenant was not kept in contact with. Further to this, it was found by some tenants that when discussing our communications with police, we refused to discuss this with the victim due to data protection, which whilst that may be the correct thing to do, the victim may feel let down by this and not understand fully.
4.1.9 Another area discussed in relation to communication was how teams within the council communicate with each other during a case. A common theme identified was how sometimes teams within the council will pass a victim to another team. This leads to the victim speaking to several different areas in the council without it being clear who is taking responsibility.
4.1.10 Covid has also presented new problems, as staff visits to properties have been limited. This includes the victims, witnesses, and perpetrators. This is an aspect of communication that we are missing out on, especially as there are occasions when perpetrators do not engage, holding up the ASB case and usually to the detriment of the victim.
4.1.11 At the end of the first meetings, we requested members of the task and finish group review our current procedure and prepare some comments for the next scheduled meeting. These comments were heard at the meetings and submitted by email. The general concern among members was the length and language used and focus on supporting the perpetrators.
4.1.12 It was agreed amongst some members of the task and finish group that due to the length and language used, some people may find it difficult to understand and highlighted that there will be a portion of tenants who would be put off by such a policy. It was suggested that a flow chart be created alongside the policy, so it was clearer how a case could progress.
4.1.13 An item at the task and finish group was present two case studies of closed ASB cases. We explained to the group the actions that were taken and why. The common feeling among members of the group was the council need to do a better job at managing expectations. After going through cases, it was clearer why the council made the decisions it did, however, victims are not always made aware of this and can lead to a feeling that the council isn’t doing enough.
4.2 Staff feedback
4.2.1 Whilst the review came from requests by tenants and the feedback from tenants will play an extremely important role in creating our recommendations, it was also important to get feedback from staff.
4.2.2 We created a survey with the scope and aims in mind of the review, that was sent to the following teams: Tenancy Team, Housing Customer Service, Temporary Accommodation, Community Safety and Seniors Housing team.
4.2.3 There was a total of 34 surveys completed, broken down as follows: Tenancy Team – 19, Housing Customer Service – 8, Temporary Accommodation – 5, Community Safety – 1, Seniors – 1. Please see Appendix 3 for the staff survey questions.
4.2.4 The common themes throughout the staff survey were similar to the tenant survey. There was a feeling that communication could be improved, the issue of responding to tenants with mental health issues was raised, keeping tenants updated, managing expectations with the legal process and actions. Additional themes were centred around staff support and training.
4.2.5 It is also worth noting that some staff did not answer some questions and we must assume here that was because they were unsure or didn’t know, which identifies knowledge gaps.
4.2.6 A lot of the focus in the survey was around the five screening questions that should be asked on initial contact, as well as staff responsibility. The initial point of contact is important in setting the tone and undertaking an effective assessment, it is also important to know the correct team have been given the case and have taken responsibility for it.
4.2.7 Screening questions are asked by Housing Customer Services as initial point of contact. This team were the most aware of what the screening questions were, However, we do expect other teams to understand them.
Half of the staff respondents were not familiar with the screening questions and others were not confident in asking them. It would seem evident that the same people who did not know what they were, were the ones who weren’t confident. A couple of things to note, 18 respondents skipped the question on confidence, so it is inferred that they are not confident in this area.
4.2.8 The questions that focused on team responsibility gave similar results. The result ties in with comments made by tenants, that they get passed to different teams, this is an identified training need amongst staff.
4.2.9 In addition to these questions, we also gave staff the opportunity to let us know of what the harder parts are of dealing with ASB in their own words, plus what their thoughts were on how the service could be improved.
4.2.10 Regarding the harder parts of dealing with ASB, the most common concern was managing the expectations of residents. It was felt by some that tenants go into the case expecting something done immediately and, in most cases, there will not be an immediate outcome.
4.2.11 In some instances, staff are required to request information from the police to progress a case. Staff fed back the length of time it takes to receive requested information from the police, can make it difficult to keep the victim updated with the progress of the case.
4.2.12 Additional comments made about the hardest part of dealing with ASB are gathering sufficient evidence to undertake enforcement action and being able to effectively support distressed victims of ASB.
4.2.13 It was also highlighted the need to deal with noise complaints effectively at an earlier stage to prevent escalation. It was mentioned that noise complaints can be the most difficult to resolve. Some suggestions include looking at our Allocations policy to enable better matching and looking at ways noise complaints can we resolved earlier.
4.2.14 Other feedback from the meeting was that we need to be direct and honest, with tenants whilst being supportive when explaining what actions can be taken.
4.2.15 It was mentioned that, as a council, we do well at taking cases to court when it is appropriate and that we should be publicising this to show we do act and the consequences of ASB are serious.
4.3.1 We have looked at a variety of complaints made to the council regarding ASB cases from across the city, with a mixture of some being upheld and not.
4.3.2 A common theme across the examples we looked at was that was victims felt the council was not doing enough to resolve the issue, with some expecting perpetrator to be evicted.
4.3.3 Another area of concern was the length of time it took to resolve cases and for action to be taken, or no action being taken.
4.3.4 Some of the complaints made included references to perceived prejudices, with some being directed towards staff. Whilst these were not upheld, it is worth noting that victims still perceived this to be the case and we must look at our communication to ensure we can minimise this issue.
4.4 Ombudsman
4.4.1 The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice, or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.
4.4.2 We have taken random cases which were looked at by the ombudsman to see if there are any common themes in their feedback which we can use to help improve the service. Seven cases were looked at, with six of those being found to have no maladministration, one of which did include a recommendation. There is one case with the Ombudsman waiting for conclusion.
4.4.3 Concerning the case where there was no maladministration found, yet a recommendation was made, the council erected a boundary fence, which the complainant felt benefited the neighbour more. The recommendation: the landlord ensures that it makes proportionate provision for residents to comment on significant decisions, and that those comments are appropriately considered and recorded. This type of complaint links to issues previously raised with staff and tenants regarding communication and managing expectations.
4.4.4 It is also important we look at the type of complaints made against the council. The most common being lack of action taken. This feeds into the common theme of communication and managing expectations and how we need to improve on this. Other complaints include allocation of accommodation to perpetrators, appropriate handling of reports of ASB and provision of support to vulnerable victims.
4.5 External Organisations
4.5.1 We spoke to some external organisations for their feedback, specifically on the policy and procedure, as well as looking into the work that Sheffield Council have done with how they approach ASB.
4.5.2 The first organisation we got feedback from was a domestic abuse charity, Stonewater. They suggested we update the term domestic violence to domestic abuse. They also had concerns with the policy and procedure, stating the following:
‘The scope of the documents is huge resulting in a document with multiple audiences – customers may find the documents overwhelming with info of strategic and development plans – reflect on the usefulness of a combined document’
4.5.3 Additional feedback was sought from a social housing barrister, Cornerstone Barristers. They also reiterated that the document was too long and questioned whether it needed the level of detail.
4.5.4 They also commented on the commitments we make in the policy. It was felt by the barrister that we were advising in the policy that certain actions will be taken that are unrealistic, which can make the court process difficult. This is in line with all the feedback we have been getting on managing expectations. It is important we get the commitments correct in the policy, so as not to give the wrong impression to the victims about what actions we can take as a landlord.
4.5.5 We liaised with Sheffield Council. They recently improved their own service, so it was necessary to find out what changes they made and how their service looks, to see what inspiration we can take from them.
4.5.6 Overall, Sheffield has larger resources to tackle ASB in their city with approximately £101 per property spent on ASB compared to B&H at £68pp 2020/21.
4.5.7 We reviewed their policy and found it to be short and concise and easy to understand. They also include a flowchart for residents to view how an ASB case will progress. These are things we can consider when we come to look at our own policy and procedure.
4.5.8 Another council we liaised with was Portsmouth. The cost of their service was given as £1.70 per week. This was calculated by looking at the ASB service charge found within the tenant’s weekly rent.
4.6 Other feedback
4.6.1 We received feedback on the complexity of mixed tenure cases. There can be situations where victims, perpetrators and witnesses may live in a variety of tenures, like temporary accommodation, council tenant or they could rent privately. Different teams across the council are responsible for ASB cases at different types of tenures and requires collaborative working should a case contain multiple tenures.
4.6.2 Should the ASB case involve individuals across these tenures, it requires cross team working, made even more challenging should it require external agency participation. Ensuring the case progresses smoothly and efficiently requires great communication and clearly defined roles and responsibilities.
4.6.3 A suggestion was made to the council via a community trigger outcome (Community Safety Team) that also needs to be considered, is that anyone reporting an incident of ASB that could also be a criminal matter is explicitly asked whether they would also like their report shared with Sussex Police, and that the outcome of that question is recorded along with the ASB report.
4.6.4 The Community Safety manager also suggested that Housing investigate using Community Protection Notices. A community protection notice (CPN) is a legal notice that can be issued against a persistent antisocial behaviour perpetrator, and the failure to comply can lead to sanctions, such as a fixed penalty notice or other legal actions.
4.6.5 We have also looked at the types of ASB-related phone calls we received through Housing Customer Services, which totalled 1,644 over a seven-month period between 01/07/21 and 31/01/22. Of these, 1,087 were new incidents being reported for the first time, 544 were regarding existing cases and 13 were anonymous reports. During the same period, 349 cases were opened relating to perpetrators of ASB.
4.6.6 There has also been some feedback from the Seniors’ Housing Manager. It is felt that ASB cases in Seniors tends to be more complex and can result in Seniors staff being taken away from other functions they perform. It was also mentioned that it can cause a conflict of interest should the staff member dealing with ASB, also be the person who is the support provider. A suggestion was made that a resource on the complex case team deal specifically with Seniors Housing ASB cases.
5. Recommendations
5.1 Policy and Procedure
5.1.1 We currently have the policy and procedure in one document. A recommendation is to split the policy and procedure into two separate documents, with the policy being published on the council’s website and the procedure kept for staff, however the corresponding procedure will be shared with the task and finish group as part of the ASB review.
5.1.2 We will introduce a new flow chart that explains the potential journey of an ASB case to include points of council intervention and legal recourse, to be published on the council’s website.
5.1.3 The policy will be re-written to be more reader friendly for all residents. This includes simpler language and reduced policy length.
5.1.4 The language will also be changed when we refer to domestic abuse.
5.1.5 An additional letter sent to a victim when an ASB case is opened that sets out the potential outcomes and meet expectations and to also advise of what support is available to the victims.
5.1.6 Initial assessment to include additional questions to identify hate crime.
5.1.7 Add into the procedure for staff to ask whether the reporter would like their report shared with Sussex Police if it is a criminal matter and that the outcome of that question is recorded along with the ASB report.
5.1.8 A review of all documents and appendices to bring them up to date.
5.2 Training
5.2.1 We recommend the following training be provided:
· Relaunch the policy – Staff will be made aware of the new policy which will be available on the council website.
.
· Relaunch the procedure – we will relaunch our procedure to ensure staff are aware of their responsibilities in relation to responding to reports of ASB.
· First point of contact – all staff to be trained to ensure they know who to refer a case to when contacted, including how and when to conduct the risk assessments and ensure referral routes are known and robust.
· Regular training program for emerging ASB trends – for both those who manage ASB cases plus first point of contact staff.
· Identifying and supporting tenants who are victims of a hate crime – working with our Learning & Development team to explore training to help staff identify a hate crime and help supporting these victims.
· Tenant representatives training – Explore offer of training to tenant representatives who wish to understand ways they may support ASB victims. We will consult with these representatives in the future about what training they wish to provide.
· Councillor workshops – offer briefings to councillors on the tools and legal recourse available to the council when dealing with ASB cases.
5.2.3 We will also be reviewing current training plans and will refresh training where appropriate.
5.3 Resources
5.3.1 Conduct analysis of ASB cases to focus on efficiencies that can be made in the service, specifically with de-escalation of ASB at an earlier point to reduce the number of ASB reports turning to cases.
5.3.2 Explore how to provide an improved response to noise complaints, by working with Environmental Health and looking at what Housing can do in respect to de-escalation and resolution of cases at an earlier point.
5.3.3 Peer reviews of Sheffield and Portsmouth councils shows that we spend less on our ASB service. We recommend that we refocus work within the HRA team to ensure we effectively resource ASB to provide an improved service.
5.4 Satisfaction surveys
5.4.1 Start surveying all residents who have had a closed ASB case. Include a survey with the case closure letter and/or online survey. Additionally, staff to have conversations with the victim to advise them that we will be sending an anonymised survey.
5.4.2 The feedback from regular surveys will inform continuous improvement and enable us to identify areas of strength and weakness in the service.
5.4.3 We will measure the impact of the recommendations by undertaking a further survey of all cases closed in 12 months of the implementation of the recommendations.
5.4.4 Improve engagement with community groups to increase feedback from residents reporting hate crime,
5.5 Additional Recommendations
5.5.1 Provide access to relevant staff to IT systems that are used in the management of ASB at an appropriate level. Currently not all staff have access which can impede in the level of customer service we can provide.
5.5.2 A separate review into the Sensitive Lets policy and procedure to include Temporary Accommodation properties and BHCC tenancies.
5.5.3 Explore the use of Community Protection Notices (CPN) for ASB within council tenancy services. CPNs are used widely by other council services.
5.5.4 Explore the use of an App to help victims report and document ASB incidents and reduce reliance on diary sheets.
5.5.5 Look at ways we can publicise statistics on court results.
5.5.6 Create a Rapid Response Strategy with partners – Community Safety Team, Temporary Accommodation and Police
|
Recommendations and purpose |
Corresponding Aim |
|
Increase the use satisfaction surveys after a case is closed - The feedback from regular surveys will inform continuous improvement and enable us to identify areas of strength and weakness in the service. |
Improved level of satisfaction with ASB services |
|
Training - Greater ownership of cases - Greater knowledge of emerging trends and the ability to spot traits and provide support at the earliest opportunity, including reporters of hate crimes - Look to resolve the case at the earliest opportunity |
Improved response at first point of contact for all reporters of ASB
Increased communication skills within the teams when responding to victims and witnesses of ASB and crime.
Improved awareness of reporting lines to ensure ASB reports are received in the correct team without delay.
Improved awareness at the first point of contact for Housing Customer Service team and improved understanding of processes for Housing Officers of new and emerging trends such as Cuckooing, Modern Slavery, Terrorism, and exploitation.
Wider understanding of roles for Police, Tenancy Services, Community Safety. |
|
Policy and Procedure - To set out expectations more clearly for residents - Provide a more reader friendly policy, so residents are clearer in how the council will respond to ASB |
Increased awareness of limitations/proportionality of actions available when dealing with ASB amongst the resident groups.
Improved available information on website |
|
Resources - Resolve a higher level of ASB cases at an earlier point where possible - Work with Environmental Health for an improved response to noise. |
Improved communication skills within the teams when dealing with victims and witnesses of ASB and crime.
Improvement in the 24 hour call back stats
Improved level of satisfaction with ASB services |
6. Implementation
|
July |
- We will have met with managers, staff and partners to discuss the recommendations and their implementation. - Work will start on drafting the new policy
|
|
August |
- We will start sending out satisfaction surveys to all closed cases.
|
|
September |
- Analyse several ASB cases to map out the customer journey - Provide access to IT systems to all relevant staff, inc training on those systems
|
|
October |
- Training plans devised and a delivery plan agreed - Agreement on how to gather and publicise statistics on successful court cases - Create Rapid Response Strategy
|
|
November |
- Solutions to how best refocus teams within HRA - First policy draft
|
|
January |
- Policy will be published following Housing Committee approval. - Reviewed how we work with Environmental Health - Completed a review of the Sensitive Lets procedure - Explored the use of an App
|
Appendix 1
5 screening questions.
The five screening questions came from government guidance and have been adopted by the police, as well Brighton & Hove City’s Housing and Safer Communities Teams.
They are as follows:
1. Is the caller (victim) safe?
2. Is the caller (victim) especially upset?
3. Have they experienced this ASB before?
4. Impact on the caller, group or family?
5. Does the caller class this as a hate crime?
Appendix 2
Tenant survey questions
1. Overall, how satisfied, or dissatisfied are you with how your anti-social behaviour or hate incident case was handled by the Housing Officer?
2. How is/was the standard of customer service you received from the Tenancy Team?
3. Is there anything we could have done to make your customer experience better?
4. How easy or difficult is/was it for you to access or use the Tenancy Team?
5. How could we have made the service easier to use?
6. How well did the Tenancy Team keep you updated throughout your case?
7. Do you feel more safe or less safe as a result of the actions taken by the Housing Officer during your case?
Appendix 3
Staff survey questions
1. Which team do you work in?
2. Are you aware of the five screening questions that need to be asked when someone first calls with a report of ASB?
3. How confident or not are you in asking the five ASB screening questions?
4. Please indicate whether you think your team should ask the five screening questions or signpost to the responsible team. This is based on tenure type.
5. Which team is responsible for dealing with reports of ASB that occur at each type of tenure?
6. Which team is responsible for dealing with reports of ASB that are made by residents of each type of tenure?
7. Please can you let us know what the hardest part of responding to reports of ASB is. Please do not include any personal information that might identify you or anybody else.