It should be noted that the Housing Service’s capacity to run such a scheme is very limited and as such isn’t recommended.

PROJECTS
In addition to the maintenance of communal areas, there is also a desire to upgrade fencing, paving and undertake essential tree works.

The titles deeds for ex-council properties does not permit Housing Services to compel private owners or landlords to contribute to the costs of these improvements, nor does HRA guidance allow Housing Services to fully fund these works.

The Mixed Team Scheme allows for essential projects to be funded without the need to seek contribution from the private owners.

If this service was to be removed, we would again be reliant on private owners and landlords being willing to pay for external improvement works.

INCOME GENERATION
In addition to the loft insulation scheme, there is an opportunity to undertake charged works for Barrhead Housing Association.

A pilot scheme has been undertaken with a service level agreement being finalised. It is estimated that this will generate an income of £10k per year. Similar to the point made as paragraph 17 the management of services for external organisations can be seen as a distraction for the Housing Service.

The income generated comes at a time and management cost of a Housing Service at full capacity.


SHARED SERVICES
An additional option considered was to consider shared services with Neighbourhood Services.

However whilst this may bring overall departmental savings, it would require the Mixed Tenure Scheme works undertaken for Housing Services, to be reduced. There is no additional capacity at present and the squad have a significant work load.

FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY

The cost of delivering the Mixed Tenure scheme is increasing and is particularly impacted by staffing costs, materials and contractors, as noted in paragraph 14.

Based on the review undertaken it is unlikely that required savings can be made and service levels maintained. In summary;

Service Reduction/Savings

Remove contracted services such as grass cutting and close cleaning –

based on 23/24 forecast budgets, this would deliver savings of £74k but would result in a significant reduction in the condition of mixed tenure communal closes and gardens.

Tenants and owners could be asked to pay for this service to cover costs but this would have to be voluntary.

Remove the budget for projects such as mixed tenure fencing slabbing and tree works
based on 23/24 forecast budgets, this would deliver savings of £5k.

As a result of rising costs, the current 23/24 has been reduced by £36k from the previous year.

This will result in a reduction in the condition of mixed tenure communal closes and gardens.

Tenants and owners could be asked to pay for works as they arise but participation would be voluntary.

The options above would save £79k, £39.5k for the General Fund and £39.5k for the HRA.

Income Generation

Chargeable works for Barrhead Housing Association - £10k per year. Following a small pilot, it was estimated that 2x mornings per week would be required with a daily rate charge of £400.

Chargeable works such as loft insulation undertaken by trainees via employability funding, this could generate £32k of income but is dependent on Scottish Government funding which may not be confirmed until May 2024.

As Scottish Government employability funding from 2024/25 may not been known until May 2024.

This paper can only confirm income generation of £10k from BHA works.

The maximum savings that can be guaranteed for the General Fund is approximately £46,700 without reducing FTE, based on the following;

CONCLUSION
The overall costs of providing the 8 FTE salary costs and their associated transport, tool and plant, compromise a significant part of the overall budget leaving little room for savings.

This paper sought to explore alternative approaches:

Remove contracted services such as grass cutting and close cleaning.

this would derive some small savings but lead to a significant deterioration of mixed tenure estate

Remove the budget for projects such as mixed tenure fencing slabbing and tree works

this would derive a small savings but prevent Housing Services undertaking improvement works in mixed tenure estates

Generate income for the service or use other funding such as Scottish Government Employability funding.

Uncertainty of Scottish Government funding prevents a throughout business plan being developed

Funding would not address supervision and management costs placing additional strain on Housing Services

After a review of all options, the paper has concluded that the target saving cannot be met.

Some small savings are possible but this would have a detrimental impact on the condition of mixed tenure estates.

------ Original Message ------
To: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Cc: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Sent: Wednesday, 17 Jan, 2024 At 12:03
Subject: Freedom of Information(FOI) Request for Review - 9121-0312-4269-4751 - Redesign of Mixed Tenure Scheme

Cc: Craig Geddes

Chief Officer (Legal and Procurement)
Council Headquarters
Rouken Glen Road
Giffnock
G46 6UG

REQUEST FOR FREEDOM OF INFORMATION(FOI) REVIEW

I wish to request FOI review for the FOI request FOI 9121-0312-4269-4751 made 15/12/2023

attached to this email.

Gerry Mahon, The Chief Officer Legal & Procurement, East Renfrewshire Council, has previously stated that FoI is normally a 2 stage process -

'As you will be aware the Council's response to an FOI request does not merely revolve around the initial request but also the review process. It is hoped that any human error in relation to the 1st part of the process is properly remedied at the 2nd stage.'

and The Scottish Information Commissioner has written -

'The duty to advise and assist
Under FOI law, authorities have a duty to advise and assist people who want to access their information. The duty to advise and assist makes sure that customer service and customer engagement are central to FOI practice.
Taking a positive and proactive approach to the duty to advise and assist will strengthen relations with service users and help build trust. Offering help, support and guidance to people looking for information will also reduce the likelihood of more FOI requests.
Legal requirement
The FOI Act requires authorities to provide reasonable advice and assistance to people who have made, or are planning to make, a request for information (section 15).
The EIRs contain a similar provision for requests for environmental information (regulation 9).
Both the FOI Act and the EIRs say that authorities which comply with the Scottish Ministers' FOI Code of Practice when providing advice and assistance are complying with the duty under FOI law.'

The Scottish Information Commissioner has also written in their December 2022 Newsletter

'Open Update: FOI News from the Scottish Information Commissioner December 2022

Make the most of the FOI review process
Authorities are always given a chance to provide comments during our appeal investigations. However, we too often see authorities change their position during the investigation, suggesting that their initial response wasn't properly thought through.
Recently we've seen examples of proper searches not being carried out until we get involved; authorities locating additional information during the investigation; confusing and inadequate submissions; exemptions being changed mid-investigation (then changed back); and authorities not knowing what information they withheld under particular exemptions. (These examples are taken from cases such as Decision 125/2022 and 128/2022). For obvious reasons, this makes an investigation more complex and more time-consuming for all involved.
The FOI 'review' stage gives authorities an opportunity to reconsider the handling of a request - and they should remember than an appeal to the Commissioner will often follow a review. Authorities should always make the most of this important opportunity to get their FOI response right.'

My reasons for requesting FOI Review are as follows -

There is public interest in this subject as ERC took the 'Mixed Tenure Scheme' in-house in 2021 after they had 'forgotten' to renew the contract , and would now appear to be trying to save £100,000 by out-sourcing the work again.

1 - It seems like an extraordinary number of emails/documents (857 documents / correspondence ) for such a limited/small review.


A lot of these may be duplicates?

Containing the same chain of emails?

Repeated emails in a chain?

2 - Concerning when ERC say - '...following a search for "Mixed Tenure Scheme Review".'

Is this a search for emails to match exactly with "Mixed Tenure Scheme Review" in the subject field? or other?

Is this a search for emails with "Mixed" or "Tenure" or "Scheme" or "Review" in the subject field? or other?

Is this a search for emails to match exactly with "Mixed Tenure Scheme Review" appearing anywhere in the email? or other?

Is this a search for emails with "Mixed" or "Tenure" or "Scheme" or "Review" appearing anywhere in the email? or other?

Is this a search for documents to match exactly with "Mixed Tenure Scheme Review" in the document/file name? or other?

Is this a search for documents with "Mixed" or "Tenure" or "Scheme" or "Review" in the document/file name? or other?

Is this a search for documents to match exactly with "Mixed Tenure Scheme Review" appearing anywhere in the documentl? or other?

Is this a search for documents with "Mixed" or "Tenure" or "Scheme" or "Review" appearing anywhere in the document? or other?


3 - ERC say

- 'Two Council officers (Head of Housing Property & Climate Services and the Resilience Officer) have identified 457 emails following a search for "Mixed Tenure Scheme Review".'

What are the names of these Council Officers?

Did these Officers carry out the search themselves?

How did they carry out the search?

- manually by looking through their mailbox?

- use an IT search SQL/script/program?

4 - ERC say

'As a minimum, there would be at least another 3 officers with emails and documentation, including Senior officers within Housing - who will likely hold more emails and documentation than the initial sample. Appreciating that some of these will be a repeat of the documentation that the initial two officers identified; I have not considered that each officer would have approximately 230 emails each; but estimated an additional 400 emails / correspondence / documents. '

Please give names and job titles of these 3 other officers.

Please give details of the assumptions used to come to this 'likelihood'

- 'who will likely hold more emails and documentation...'


5 - ERC say - 'Based upon a Council officer being able to access 10 -15 documents / correspondence per hour...'

What is this 'access'?

Please give description of processes Council Officer is actually performing to 'access' here.

How is the number '10 - 15 documents / correspondence per hour...' arrived at?

Please give description of processes Council Officer is actually performing here for each document/correspondence that restricts them to '10 - 15 documents / correspondence per hour...' .

Why can more than '10 - 15 documents / correspondence per hour...' not be processed?


6. Obviously all 857 documents / correspondence were not written/sent/received at the one time.

To enable me to consider and reply to the ERC request -

'It may be possible to further lower the costs associated with your request if you can be more specific on the nature of correspondence / all documentation sought; or narrow the timeframe.'

It will be helpfull if ERC can group these 857 documents / correspondence into the months they were written -

(This should be a simple IT query )

March 2023
April 2023
May 2023
June 2023
July 2023
August 2023
September 2023
October 2023
November 2023
December 2023

Your help will be appreciated.

Thanks