Creativity and Partnership:

Case study evidence from the Empty Homes Community Grants Programme

Empty Homes Network Conference May 2015

Dr Halima Sacranie and

Professor David Mullins

Housing and Communities Research Group

University of Birmingham

KEY THEMES:

• The EHCGP and Case Study Background

• Six Positive Outcomes from EHCGP

• Partners – an Essential Ingredient

• Partner Types and Drivers

• The Importance of

Partnerships in EHCGP

• Expectations and Looking Ahead

Empty Homes Community Grants Programme (EHCGP)

2011-15 Funding Programme

• £50 million capital funding

• Non-registered providers (i.e. Community-led)

• 110 successful projects – lease or buy and improve

• Over half groups not involved before the programme

• Filled in gaps in the map

• Peer support network through Self-help housing.org.

‘a bold departure from large scale procurement of affordable

housing…'

EHCGP OUTPUTS BY REGION Region Grant (Rounds 1&2) Underspend Re-allocated

into region

Bedrooms Properties

London £10.1 million 603 246

Midlands £5.9 million £600k 684 289

North West £6.1 million £550k 796 454

South East/East £3.7 million £350k 556 124

South West £3.8 million £220k 401 165

North East/Yorkshire

& Humberside £19.5 million £3.1 million 1084 481

TOTALS 49.1 million £4.8 million 4124 1759

Provisional outputs pending Tribal Final Monitoring 2015

EHCGP- The Midlands Region • Midlands received total

grant of £4,474,016.

• 15% of the national grant total and the third highest award amount after London and the Northwest.

• Highest number of empty properties (355) and the bedrooms (955) to be brought in to use.

• Few projects previously active in Region

• 19 of 24 grant applications receiving funding.

Location of Midlands

organisations

EHCGP Yorkshire and Humberside Regions

• Yorkshire and Humberside awarded largest share of grant any region (£13 million).

• 15 Yorkshire and Humberside projects received Round 1 funding.

• 8 of these also received Round 2 allocations.

• 7 organisations received underspend funding.

Cluster of well established projects in Leeds (e.g. LATCH, Canopy) , Hull

(e.g.Giroscope, PROBE) added to by new projects across region.

EHCGP North East Region

• North East grant allocation just over £9 million.

• 13 participating organisations

• Round 1: 10 successful bids

• Round 2: 6 existing EHCGP recipients and 3 new bidders received funding.

• 7 organisations received underspend funding.

Some well established groups (e.g. Community Campus), networked

with new entrants. Mix of homelessness, community finance,

mental health organisations

Case Study Methodology

• 15 Case Studies

• Up to 5 semi-structured, qualitative interviews per case study.

• In-depth interview with the Project champion and key partners, managers, contractors, residents, volunteers or apprentices.

• Case studies represent broad array of community orgs and projects Start Again,

Birmingham

3 bed semi-detached

Apprentice on site

Organisation Reg.

Charity

Reg.

Provider

Com-

munity

Interest

company

(CIC)

Company

Ltd. by

Guaran-

Tee

Com-

munity

Benefits

society

Social

Enter-

prise

Birmingham YMCA X

Canopy X X

Changing Lives X X

Community Campus

87

X X

Emmaus Coventry X X

Fresh Horizons X X

Five Lamps X X X

Giroscope X X

Hill Holt

Gainsborough

X x

Keyhouse X X

LATCH X

Middlesbrough CLT X

R&C Mind X X

Start Again Project X

Windrush Alliance X X

Multiple Outcomes

Housing Solutions:

Affordable and accessible

Empty Homes

Benefits to

Owners

Community Based

Social Enterprise

Employment & Training

Construction

Skills &

Qualifications

Active participation

Building confidence

Safer

Neighbourhoods

Secure

communities

Six Positive Outcomes from EHCGP

1. Value for Money

2. Localism

3. Tackling skills gap and youth

unemployment

4. Rewarding volunteering

5. Solutions to wicked problems

6. Building Strong and Independent

Organisations and a vibrant

community-led sector

Making the Grant go a long way

Inputs and Returns

Doing things differently by being local

Genuine pathways into work

Mature construction workforce

Volunteering to Homes

Volunteering to Work

Decent Homes for clients

Offender resettlement

Diverse volunteers and good landlord

Self-help that fits needs of vulnerable

Tackling Blight and Anti-social behaviour

Assets, balance sheet and cashflow

Vibrant Sector, Going viral, networking

Local Authority partners

1. Making the Grant Go a Long Way

2.5 properties will be delivered for every one funded from EHCGP and total funding secured for empty homes work is equivalent to 4.5 times the original EHCGP grant.

Changing Lives, Gateshead

125 Homes for Clients

Borrowing £3.8million

Organisation Reserves

£0.7 million

HCA Grant £1.7millon

Other Grant £1million

EHCGP £1.3 million

125 homes for clients

Work for construction team of 5 tradesmen, 6 trainees,

and 1 apprentice

How the EHCGP Grant was used

• Lease and Repair - using EHCGP for capital expenditure for use in refurbishment cost ; housing benefit and rent used to cover leasing costs

• Purchase and Repair- EHCGP funding to contribute towards the purchase cost of properties; additional private borrowing or reserves used to contribute towards both purchase and refurbishment costs

Wide range of Inputs & Returns

Grant recycling (charge owners for works)

Management fees for leased properties

‘unrestricted’ Rental income for purchased properties (LHA level)

Construction Training Board (for training completed)

Community Right To Build & Locality (for feasibility and support)

Jobs Fund (for trainees) Some Supporting People (for

residents) Charitable donations and volunteer

time Furnishing Grants Soft loans and grants Commercial Loans

Social Value: Canopy CBA calculation £4.28 social value for each £ of external investment

Benefits to volunteers (self-esteem, skills and motivation)

Benefits to tenants (home and friends)

Benefits to community (less derelict property)

Third party benefits (savings to public services)

Plus Impacts on organisational viability (assets, unrestricted income, cash flow & influence)

INPUTS Financial and social returns

2. Doing Things Differently by Being Local

THE BENEFITS OF BEING LOCAL Fresh Horizons has a strong local community focus

leading to local regeneration impact, local jobs, local economic impact and a unique advantage in

negotiating with local property owners

25 properties in Sheepridge Village Centre refurbished under EHCGP .

Local jobs, apprenticeships and training for construction team of 18

and 3 local SME partners.

3. Making a Difference …..Genuine pathways into work and workforce

development

‘the approach makes a major difference to these kids’ lives…they have a sense of self-worth and feel they have achieved something. Spending the grants and hitting the targets are less important than the guys on the sites’.

After 8 years working at Mears and 3 at Places for People the Construction Manager at TCUK

was initially sceptical of including trainees and apprentices within his team, but after three

years at TCUK he is now convinced of the difference this makes!

Pathways into Work From Training Hub to Mature Workforce

2010 Future Jobs Fund. 10 trainees for 6 months, one construction manager.

2015 EHCGP. 3 levels of staff, 5 apprenticeships with college day release, 10 trainees beyond NVQ2 several skilled tradesmen and two site supervisors and construction manager.

“I started on a trainee course for the government. Now I’m doing an apprenticeship. .. I’m doing a plastering course which I’d never done before ….Its brought me from the streets into work which I like’.

Apprentice Fresh Horizons (in workforce 18 months and previously

a volunteer, always lived in Deighton)

TRANSFORMATION FOR FRESH HORIZIONS BETWEEN 2010 AND 2015 DUE TO EHCGP WORKFLOW

4. Rewarding Volunteering “everyone works together, we have a laugh and it’s a good vibe. It’s a good vibe between us all...” Volunteer, (Canopy tenants must do at least 12 days work on their future home to be eligible to move in) “A lot of us did it ....we did it for the provisional (driving licence). I did the presbytery garden.. that was all right that was an experience as well.” Former Volunteer, Fresh Horizons, who then moved on to trainee and apprentice roles

Volunteer painters, Canopy, Leeds.

5. Real Solutions to ‘wicked problems’

“none of the landlords would give me a chance being from prison…then these guys said we’ve got somewhere but it’s not ideal. But I said look anywhere is good for me, just let me have my own space. I’ve never been happier” Ex-offender and former volunteer now living and working for Redcar and Cleveland Mind

“we were getting more and more people through the door who were in poor private rented …people with a mental health difficulty are less likely to be able to maintain a tenancy. ” Project Champion, Redcar and Cleveland Mind

Refurbishment in Progress, Redcar

Mental health and ex-offenders, Redcar

Decent homes in PRS for groups without homelessness priority

• Secure decent housing for housing advice clients in Keighley & Scarborough

• Move-on from supported housing

• Expand PRS management stock but improve quality

• Acquire assets

Key House, Keighley, York, Scarborough and Calderdale

6. Building Strong and Independent Organisations

Canopy’s had a good year – a good two years really, largely thanks to the Empty Homes Community Grant programme. …..the staff team has doubled as a result of the increased activity and income, so we’ve doubled from eight staff up to 16 staff currently. We’ve been able to buy 13 properties. That’s massively improved our balance sheet, giving us much better assets and more sustainability going forward.

Project Champion Canopy, Leeds

Importance of Partners in Self-Help Housing

Five Essential Ingredients:

• PROPERTIES

• WORKFORCE

• RESIDENTS

• FUNDING

• PARTNERS (Mullins, 2011)

Defining partnership • Partnership as joint working involving otherwise

independent bodies co-operating to achieve a common goal, involving sharing relevant information, risks and rewards (Audit Commission, 1998).

• For the EHCGP case studies partners defined as organisations or individuals external to the case study organisation i.e. not part of the workforce directly involved in refurbishing the empty properties.

Case Study Findings: Key Partners Key sources for properties, funds, people, skills:

Local authorities/ councils/ Empty property officers

Council Voluntary Services

Banks and other funders

Contractors

Property Owners and Private Landlords

Housing Associations

Local colleges and Training bodies

Self-Help.Housing.Org

Housing Professionals

Partners play role in:

• Properties, funds, people, skills

• Distinct phases over which partners helped case study organisations with their projects from the bidding phase, finding suitable properties, financing or funding the lease or purchase , refurbishing and finding suitable tenants.

Function of Partners Critical Enabler

Adviser

Funder

Expert Partner

Network Partner/ Ally

Buddy

Reluctant partner

Partnership Drivers: 3 categories according to the underlying rationale behind

the partnership with the case study organisation:

Partnerships in

Community-Led Housing

Commercial

Collaborative Value-Based

Commercial

• Market-based category

• Partnerships underpinned by financial drivers e.g. case of funders, private landlords, or professional housing service providers

• Often formal or contractual partnerships

• Can be viewed as vertical partnerships with a top-down structure.

Can a financially binding relationship can be regarded as partnership?

NO: Market based or contractual relationships are the opposite of a trust-based partnership network . Powell (1990), Thomson (2003) and Sullivan and Skelcher (2002)

YES: EHCGP case study evidence , particularly around supportive funders, supports the view that market based partners can also share a higher level of engagement beyond their contractual agreement (Bovaird, 2006).

Collaborative

• Symbiotic relationships with a mutually beneficial output

• Strategic fit between the purpose of the Empty Homes project and the partner organisation.

• Includes networking with other local charities and agencies

• Horizontal type partnerships.

• The collaborative role played by partnerships in project success was captured by one case study champion: “We realised as an organisation we can’t do this on our own, so it’s finding the right partnership in order that we can fulfil that global objective.”

• This would tie in with the most prevalent interpretation of partnerships where “partnership suggests at least two agencies with common interests working together, in a relationship characterised by some degree of trust, equality and reciprocity,” Rees et al (2012: 14).

• Good examples of this are Birmingham and Leeds city councils working with Empty Homes case study organisations, where a successful project outcome is mutually beneficial to the case study organisation and the respective city council in bringing empty properties back into use, tackling urban blight, providing employment opportunities, returning empty properties back to use for marginalised and deprived sections of society and also providing housing for people regarded as high risk for other mainstream social housing providers.

Collaborative • “We realised as an organisation we can’t do this

on our own, so it’s finding the right partnership in order that we can fulfil that global objective.” Case Study Project Champion

• Most prevalent interpretation of partnerships where “partnership suggests at least two agencies with common interests working together, in a relationship characterised by some degree of trust, equality and reciprocity,” Rees et al (2012: 14).

Case Study Examples: Collaborative partnerships

• Birmingham, Hull and Leeds city councils

• Working with Empty Homes case study organisations where successful project outcome is mutually beneficial

• Tackling urban blight, providing employment opportunities, returning empty properties back to use for marginalised and deprived sections of society, providing housing for people too high risk for other mainstream social housing providers.

“the empty homes programme has put us in a different position…put us out there on the local radar ..and we weren’t there before. It’s created relationships that we never had. It’s

given us ways into other networks and that’s been important for us. I can just pick up the phone now and things get sorted’

Project Champion, Redcar and Cleveland Mind

Collaborative Partnerships

Tackling Abandonment, Blight and ASB

“The great thing about Empty

Homes…it was not only

refurbishing properties and

putting them back into use

but also meeting other

agendas on the councils

such as youth homelessness

which is huge and rising, and

also creating a stronger and

better community. So all in

all it was a bit of a win-win

situation.” Start Again Project, Birmingham

Mutually Beneficial

Value-based

• Driven by personal relationships

• Shared values, ethics or a common vision for the promotion of self-help housing.

• Tend to be informal and advisory/ support based.

• E.g. guidance and support from Self-help-housing.org to be crucial to the success of their project.

• In Tees Valley and Leeds, Community Campus, Canopy and Latch had similar shared value

collaborations.

Partnerships strengthening the community-led sector

Strong organisations have actively fostered wider sector, Leeds and Tees Valley: ‘we’ve worked with these organisations to help build the infrastructure and look at things like bidding for grants and meeting each other and going to visit schemes; good old-fashioned community building’ Community Campus Project Champion

Local authorities a key partner – LATCH 25 years celebration speech “like a love letter to the council”.

Community Campus Workforce

–Stockton on Tees

Looking ahead- Case Study Findings

• Opportunity for the further growth of the community led housing sector

• Collaborative partnerships between community organisations and councils can work well to reap benefits for cities and towns.

• Guidance from knowledgeable advisors can empower small community based organisations to bid for and undertake grant funded projects

The importance of partnerships in community led housing

• Contribution to successful project outcome and wider social benefits - reinforcing existing literature on partnerships as the most important ingredient of self-help housing (Mullins, 2011)

• Crucial to sectors’ longevity and sustainability

• Political landscape post 2105 general election

• Public service reform and deficit reduction

• Increased integration of public, private and third sectors and partnership delivery of services

• Leveraging partnerships in absence of further capital grant/ funding rounds

After EHCGP? “For Self-help housing to grow

and develop there needs to be further community grants funding to bring empty private properties into use.”

2011-15 grant programme was

ring fenced to non-registered providers and led to wider social value and community impact.

Looking to the future: • Why is public funding needed? • Why did ring fencing work? • How can wider community

impacts be encouraged? • What is the appetite for more?

Other opportunities • Meanwhile Use –

Development pipeline • Managing Hard to let social

housing • Asset transfers

“For Self-help housing to grow and develop there needs to be further community grants funding to bring empty private properties into use.”

“The potential for additional activities to manage hard to let properties for registered

providers, development pipeline properties and asset

transfers should also be explored.”

Why Public Funding has to be part of the mix

• Continuing to attract smaller locally focused groups

• Without it other funding not attracted or doesn’t stack up

• Mix of grant, soft loans and interest bearing loans makes things happen

• Without the Grant the sector was clustered in certain places with fewer than 50 active organisations – now well over 100 and active in every region

Why ring-fencing to non registered housing providers worked

• Without ring fencing grant unlikely to reach street level

• Mainstream providers not interested in street properties

• Barriers to new entrants to sector substantial

• Some have built up track record & registered with HCA

• Most would not meet new stringent financial viability and governance standards

How can wider social and community impacts be encouraged?

‘everybody likes collaborative working but nobody wants to accept responsibility…………..’

‘When you say, 'Oh, it's going to take a bit longer,' they'll go, 'Oh, is it worth it?.........’ ‘The impact for apprentices and clients is massive, but sometimes that gets lost in the ether’. Project Champion, Community Campus

An Appetite for More

2014 Self-Help-Housing & Hact survey indicated an appetite for further growth:

• £52m grant required over the next three years

• Confirmed benefits of a small scale locally focused approach

• And potential for leverage

• Scope for viral expansion!

‘The success of our project has inspired us to want to do more. We would seek a mix of property types and

community areas’

(Goodwin Development Trust, Hull)

THANK YOU

For more information:

Housing and Communities Research Group http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/social-policy/housing-

communities

Prof David Mullins – D.W.Mullins@bham.ac.uk

Dr Halima Sacranie - H.Sacranie@bham.ac.uk