Section 3 and 4 Links
The process of setting objectives and generating and appraising strategic options is a key stage in the strategic process, involving a structured and rational approach to thinking about alternative ways of using limited resources to best effect so as to achieve objectives.
Sue Goss & Bob Blackaby (1998) Designing Local Housing Strategies - A Good Practice Guide, p86. Published by Chartered Institute of Housing and Local Government Association.
Examples of a basic aim that an authority might be seeking to achieve are:
'To ensure that people who wish to live in the authority can obtain access to a range of good quality housing alternatives from which they may select housing of a type and tenure appropriate to their requirements, aspirations and means';
'To ensure there are no communities in the authority which feel disadvantaged relative to their fellow citizens because of the housing they occupy, or have available to them'.
An acronym, used in the context of specifying outputs and outcomes for monitoring and evaluation frameworks, meaning:
Specific - not vague, general or ambiguous;
Measurable - identify data sources, consider the cost of data collection and set a base-line so that change can be measured;
Agreed - with partners, internal decision-making structures;
Realistic/ Relevant - clearly derived from objectives, attainable but challenging and a consequence of action;
Timed - can be short, medium or long term but should be specified.
It is important to set objectives at the right level. They should not be so vague that they cannot help to guide choices and action during the time span of the strategy, but not so precise that they simply list tasks, in which case flexibility is lost, and it is impossible to measure whether or not the tasks achieved the objectives. To be useful at the strategic level, an objective should set direction and make clear the changes are wanted, preferably in outcome terms, but allow different ways to achieve it.
Sue Goss & Bob Blackaby (1998) Designing Local Housing Strategies - A Good Practice Guide, p86. Published by Chartered Institute of Housing and Local Government Association.
Examples of strategic objectives, which might flow from these basic aims are:
'Improve the quality and popularity of housing on low demand public sector estates by 2010';
'Achieve a 50% reduction in the amount of BTS housing in the private sector in specific areas by 2005';
'Increase the diversity of tenure in specific areas by 2008';
'Avoid the build up of geographical concentrations of specific forms of tenure through development planning and residential new build investment strategies between now and 2015';
'To eradicate the problem of substandard housing in the authority by 2020';
'To reduce homelessness to less than 1% of the total households in the authority by 2012, and have appropriate and acceptable temporary accommodation available for this 1% at all times';
'To improve the management of social housing within the authority in terms of reduced refusal and relet rates by 2004'
All these illustrative objectives have a number of features in common. Firstly, they are all consistent with the underlying basic aim. (At the same time they would all obviously have to be consistent with the analysis of underlying problems within the authority). Secondly, they are all explicit in terms of what is to be done and over what timescale. This provides the basis for an authority to monitor its own progress towards achieving its strategy over time. Finally, they are all achievable in more than one way. These alternatives may have different time profiles of impact, different mixtures of capital/revenue funding associated with them and different mixtures of public/private input/output. These are the strategic options associated with each objective.
See also p88 Sue Goss & Bob Blackaby (1998) Designing Local Housing Strategies - A Good Practice Guide. Published by Chartered Institue of Housing and Local Government Association.
Where groups of local people are invited to discuss an issue in some depth to provide a greater understanding of what the problems are and how they might be tackled.
A group of citizens are selected through a random process and invited to work together for a number of days on exploring a problem, hearing expert evidence and making recommendations.
There are a range of techniques for setting up conferences or workshops in which local people work collaboratively on problems and issues with each other or with professionals, negotiate possible solutions and move towards agreement about a way forward.
Tips:
Set quantitative targets for the long and short term;
Make targets stretching but achievable;
Make sure you understand the relationship between inputs, outputs and outcomes;
Use timed milestones or intermediate outcomes to see whether work is on track;
Think about risk, and your capability to deliver;
Have a balanced set of targets;
Identify actions to deliver each target;
Beware of perverse incentives resulting from poorly designed measures.
Source: Your delivery strategy, a practical look at business planning and risk (2001). Produced by the Cabinet Office and HM Treasury.
Promoting Government initiatives
Through their bulletins, advice centres and close contact with residents, local authorities are in a strong position to promote uptake of government initiatives and grants.
Central Heating Programme
The Scottish Executive's Central Heating Programme aims to provide all old-age pensioners and social rented sector tenants with full central heating and insulation. As well as installing central heating in their own properties, local authorities can also promote the scheme to older people in the private sector. In their draft LHS, Aberdeenshire Council intend promoting uptake of the scheme as a way of meeting their fuel poverty objectives. For more details on the Central Heating Programme for the private sector contact the Eaga Partnership Scotland. For details of the scheme for tenants of registered social landlords, please contact your local Communities Scotland office.
Mortgage to Rent scheme
In January 2003, the Minister for Social Justice launched a scheme to help owner-occupiers in mortgage difficulties to change their tenure to a tenancy within the social rented sector. This scheme facilitates the sale of the property to a social landlord and subsidises the purchase to enable the landlord to charge a social rent. A subsidy is also available to enable the landlord to make repairs to the property. The scheme is administered by a dedicated team in Communities Scotland head office and most referrals to the scheme will be made by advice centres, as owners are required to have received advice in order to be eligible for the scheme. Local authorities, through their own advice centres, are likely to be involved in advising people about the scheme and making a referral.
For more information on the scheme visit the website or contact the team.
It is important initially to set out as many options as possible perhaps using a technique which encourage creative thinking.
Sue Goss & Bob Blackaby (1998) Designing Local Housing Strategies - A Good Practice Guide, p89. Published by Chartered Institue of Housing and Local Government Association.
Ways in which local authorities intervene in the housing market
Direct provision of housing
Providing additional homes through new build and conversions
Repairing, improving and adapting existing homes
Letting and managing homes
Commissioning and funding
Capital and revenue support for registered social landlord new build and renovation projects
Funding voluntary organisations, e.g. for services to homeless people
Revenue support for projects providing for people with specific support needs
Financial support to households
Grant aid for house renovation and adaptation
Housing Benefit
Mortgages for house purchase and improvement
Providing loan guarantees
Setting up mortgage resource schemes
Running or funding rent deposit and bond bank schemes
Facilitating
Assembling land
Making things happen by bringing organisations together, such as landowners, builders and funders
Using planning powers for the provision of affordable housing
Use of compulsory purchase powers, e.g. to bring empty homes back into use
Providing funding, training and other help to self build groups
Setting up tool loan and training projects to enable residents to do repairs themselves
Setting up home maintenance services
Sue Goss & Bob Blackaby (1998) Designing Local Housing Strategies - A Good Practice Guide, pp15-17. Published by Chartered Institue of Housing and Local Government Association.
For an example of strategic options for objectives, if we take the first hypothetical strategic objective listed above, i.e. 'improve the quality and popularity of housing on low demand public sector estates by 2010', how might this be achieved? The options might include:
Do nothing;
Improve local management;
Clear (in part) for private sector new build;
Transfer to a housing association for area renewal;
Set up a joint development company for comprehensive area redesign.
There are, no doubt, other possible options. Those outlined might well be mixed and matched. Each will have a different profile of costs and benefits associated with them, as well as different levels of certainty and risk associated with the ultimate outcome. Selection of the preferred option(s) is again a judgmental process, but it is possible and good practice to make the reasoning clear for selecting one option in whole or part and rejecting others.
Key stages in option appraisal
Define operational objectives;
Agree criteria against which to assess options;
Generate options;
Identify, quantify and where possible value costs and benefits;
Assess risks and uncertainties;
Appraise options against the criteria;
Select preferred option(s).
Sue Goss & Bob Blackaby (1998) Designing Local Housing Strategies - A Good Practice Guide, pp100-101. Published by Chartered Institute of Housing and Local Government Association.
Checklist for generating and appraising options
Are objectives clear, achievable, consistent, and agreed by all key stakeholders?
Is the appraisal criteria agreed by key stakeholders?
They should reflect all the important dimensions of strategic choice and be defined so as to help to discriminate between options. Are they measurable?
Does the process of option generation ensure that important options are not overlooked? Is it sufficiently inclusive? Are options described in enough detail to be capable of appraisal?
Are options appraised in a rigorous, transparent manner?
Has careful consideration been given to the way in which the strategy will be resources?
Have all the available resources been considered, including staff and management time and energy as well as revenue and capital?
Have all the possible sources of funding been considered?
Is there a realistic chance of achieving the strategy given the resources identified?
Is there a process to consider options such as stock transfer, joint venture companies and other approaches?
Sue Goss & Bob Blackaby (1998) Designing Local Housing Strategies - A Good Practice Guide, pp102-103. Published by Chartered Institue of Housing and Local Government Association.
In demonstrating a monitoring framework incorporating annual targets the example of the strategic objective: 'Improve the quality and popularity of housing on low demand public sector estates by 2010' can be used. The authority might have concluded on the basis of strategic option analysis that the best way to achieve this on a particular estate would be to set up a joint development company for comprehensive area redesign. While the process would not be complete over the period of the initial (5 year) plan, we might expect considerable progress towards it. Evidence of the unpopularity of the estate might include:
Absence of a waiting list for the area;
High relet rates compared to the rest of the social stock within the authority;
Survey evidence that people living within and outside the area hold the area in low esteem;
Low land and property values in the area;
Low demand for private housing in the area (if any) which transacts at lower values and/or takes longer to sell than otherwise equivalent housing in other areas.
In outcome terms, these are the indicators the authority might choose to concentrate on to judge the progress of its strategy. Annual targets might include:
Increase the average length of tenancy in the by 5% per annum until it matches the authority average;
Increase land values each year by 10% until they match the values of equivalent land in non stigmatised areas;
Reduce the net out migration from the area by 2% per annum, until the net migration rate equals zero.
Underlying these targets may well be programme based targets relating to the number of properties demolished, rehabilitated or built in specific sectors or tenures, but it is important to see these as means to an end, the outputs, rather than ends in themselves.
Types of measures and indicators
Input measures (staff time, costs, meetings, reports, management or project effort) other useful diagnostic data, since they provide information on what has been invested in order to try and achieve change. It is important to combine input measures with output measures to offer basic efficiency measures (units of input per unit of output). They do not, on their own, offer any evidence of what has been achieved.
Process measures offer useful information about the ways that services are being provided, or the ways that strategy is being implemented. They can help to check on methods, milestones and the experience that staff, users and others have of the service. On their own, they say little, but they can offer evidence of service quality, or contribute important information about why a particular approach worked, or failed. They can be important indicators of the success of relationships, partnerships, or implementation processes.
Output measures are vital to give a picture of the volume of service provided and are the basis for measures of efficiency. Output measures help to tell whether results are being achieved and whether a significant different is taking place. However, unless it is known whether theses are the right results, the effectiveness of strategy cannot be determined. It would be possible to increase the number of training sessions offered to local people without ensuring that anyone actually was enabled to get a job. Nevertheless in those areas where the output is the outcome (such as numbers of homes improved) output measures are all important.
Outcome measures enable an assessment of whether the objectives of a programme were met and whether there were any unintended effects, either positive or negative. Measuring outcomes is difficult and it is often impossible to be sure that the outcomes was achieved by a particular action or service. Outcomes are often the joint product of several policies, as well as being influenced by a multitude of external factors. There is often a long lag between outputs and outcomes. Outcome measures help to answer the question 'is this working? Are we going in the right direction? Are we making a different?
Sue Goss & Bob Blackaby (1998) Designing Local Housing Strategies - A Good Practice Guide, pp125-126. Published by Chartered Institue of Housing and Local Government Association.
During the development stage of the strategy is thought being given on the way it will be evaluated?
Have clear objectives for the strategy been set? Without clear objectives a strategy cannot be evaluated. It is generally helpful to set objectives out in a hierarchy and the links between policy instruments and lower level objectives made explicit.
Have measures of inputs, process, outputs and outcomes been developed? Is the balance right? Outcomes measures are the most important in judging success, although measures of input, process and outputs are helpful in diagnosing the reasons for success or failure.
Does the evaluation include qualitative as well as quantitative information?
Do new information systems need to be set up?
What proposals are there to incorporate the judgement of service users and partners? Have ways been devised of testing their perceptions?
Do the measures or indicators chosen reflect the things that matter most to service users?
As well as assessing the achievement of objectives, do the methods of evaluation look for any unintended effects?
Does the evaluation make comparisons? Comparisons are essential. Attempts must be made to determine how much of any observed change is due to intervention and how much would have happened anyway.
If strategic outcomes are long term, what are the short term changes that are expected?
Do the measures or indicators chosen reflect government priorities and offer scope for comparison?
Are there ways of assessing the contribution that other agencies make to achieving the strategy?
If there is evidence that things are not going well, is there a process for changing the strategy?
Sue Goss & Bob Blackaby (1998) Designing Local Housing Strategies - A Good Practice Guide, p128. Published by Chartered Institue of Housing and Local Government Association.
