Transcript Rethinking and Valuing Social Housing

Rethinking & Valuing Social Housing – brief
outline
Dr Judy A Kraatz
Senior Research Fellow, Urban Research Program, Griffith University
Giles Thomson, Curtin University Sustainability Program
1
Valuing social housing: the team
•
Core partners:
o
Western Australian Housing Authority – Sarah Mewett
o
Queensland Department of Housing and Public Works – Heidi Roberts
o
NSW Land and Housing Corporation – Kathy Roil and Catherine Stuart
o
Griffith University – Dr Judy Kraatz
o
Curtin University – Dr Giles Thomson; Prof. Peter Newman
•
Project Partner: National Affordable Housing Consortium Qld
•
Project Affiliates:
o
Judy Yates - Project Steering Group Independent Chairperson
o
Access Housing - Lyn Brun
o
Logan City - Andre Brits
o
Common Ground Brisbane - Sonia Keep
o
Brisbane Housing Company – Roxy Hotton
o
KPMG - Tina Davey
2
Rethinking Social Housing - scene setting
Government - cross-agency focus
National, state & local engagement
Address housing &non-housing
outcomes
Policy, regulation & contract
management
Build productivity in housing network
Independent research
Analysis of existing research
Facilitate engagement to develop:
• Objectives, outcomes &
indicators
• Methodologies for ROI &
causal links
• Systems dynamic modelling
Community housing providers
Grounding research in the sector
Place-making
Social & affordable housing
provision & delivery
Long term sustainable provision
Fiscal policy perspective –
revenue increases if social
housing has positive
productivity benefits
Macroeconomic impact
of housing intervention –
incl. productivity and
growth
Strategic Evaluation Framework (E6)
Person-Community-Place-Specific
Diverse and unique characteristics
Test-cases to: contribute past data; &
test selected criteria in pilot framework
Emergency Shelter
Transitional
Housing
Government Housing Assistance
Social Housing
Affordable Rental
Non-Market (Community) Housing
Private Rental
Home Ownership
Market Housing
Rethinking Social Housing - Conceptual Framework
4
Developing the Strategic Evaluation Framework
Outcomes &
Indicators
Community
Develop Strategy
1.31
Reporting
Develop methodologies
Case studies
Applicable to future
innovative delivery models
Education
Employment
Financial
Health
Housing
Consider timescale &
locality, geography
Enable assessment of
productivity benefits:
•Macro-economic
•Tenants benefits
•Fiscal benefits
•Non-economic – environ
& social
Draft
framework
Industry
Reports &
Media
Journal /
conference
papers
Associations and Causal
links – drawing on
ecosystems health models
NSW/Qld and
NAHC - framework
integration into
current practice
Social Return on
investment – Social Cost
Benefit Analysis and WellValuation Analysis
WA Housing – data
integration
Social
Urban
Well-being
Elements:
- Associations & Causal
links
- ROI: social & econ
- Data
SBEnrc Project 1.31 Rethinking Social Housing
Aug 14 - Sept 15
ARC Linkage
submission
Nov 15
SBEnrc Project 1.41 Valuing Social Housing
Feb 16 - Mar 17
5
Elements of the strategic evaluation framework
Outcomes
&Indicators Matrix
Associations /
Causal links
analysis
ROI allocations
Data sources
•for each of the 9 objectives: community engagement; education;
employment; environment; economic; health & well-being;
housing; social; urban amenity
•extablish methodology
•identify existing verified links
•gap analysis
•future expert panel to establish associations and/or causal links
•social and economic
•housing and non housing
•using SROI, SCBA and WVA initially as basis for gap analysis (see
Section 3)
•identify existing secondary sources
•gap analysis
•indentify future primary data gathering opportunities
6
Domains & Outcomes @ 14/9/15
Community
Employment
(31 indicators)
(5 indicators)
(8 indicators)
Rights & empowerment
Equitable opportunities
Community connectedness
Social capital and cohesion
Culturally rich
Strong neighbourhood
Perceptions of disorder
Increased participation
Mobility
Improved physical &
mental health
Reduced service demand
Improved access to
services
Active & healthy living
Improved productivity
Improved access to healthy
living
Housing
(30 indicators)
Education
(20 indicators)
Increased participation
Enhanced performance
Access
Environment
(19 indicators)
Urban Amenity
(21 indicators)
Place-making
Neighbourhood resources
Socialising
Area regeneration
Access to community
activities
Cultural heritage & identity
Urban design
Health & Well-being
Reduced resource
consumption
Reduced resource waste
Bldg & site design
appropriates & quality
Quality of life
+ve impact on
environment
Appropriate density
Improved access
Ability to maintain tenancy
Appropriate targeting &
provision
Effective provision
Higher levels of inclusion
Improved amenity
Effective asset
management
Adequate insurance
Social
(17 indicators)
Improved social
wellbeing
Reduced antisocial
activity
Reduced drug & alcohol
dependence
Improved family
relationships
Economy/Productivity
(33 indicators)
Property values
ROI
Business Agility
Economic stimulation
Industry & personal productivity
Long term savings
Financial flexibility
Reduced financial stress
Housing affordability &
Availability
Balanced supply and demand
Reinvestment in housing &
services
Drawn from: AIHW 2011; Randolph and Judd 2001; Bridge, Flatau et al. 2003; Judd and Randolph 2006; Bridge, Flatau et al. 2007; Milligan, Phibbs et al.
2007; Monk and Whitehead 2010; Ravi and Reinhardt 2011; Bröchner and Olofsson 2012; Wood and Cigdem 2012; Fujiwara 2013; Fujiwara 2014; Trotter
and Vine 2014; Pawson, Milligan et al. 2014; Carboni 2014, GRI 2014; Green Star; Steering Committee 2013; and others.
7
Draft indicator matrix – under development
Both quantitative and qualitative;
understanding economic,
environment and social return on
investment critical
Provide narratives for
these to build
understanding and
assist with consistency
Impacts/Benefits/Dis-benefits
Outcome Indicator
Locale /
region
Timefra Macrome
economi
S/M/L
c
Fiscal
Measured Return on Investment & value to whom
Tenant
Track outcomes
over time
location
specific data
and
relevance
State &
Federal
Territory Local
Gov.
(stamp
Gov.
Other
Comm- (Monetar
duty, (planning e.g.
unity
y&
land tax, process CHO
Fiscal
environm charges)
policy)
ent
Data
Source/
Tools
Survey,
Quantit- QualitDatasets
ative
ative
etc.
Determine
availability/applicability
of available of data
from existing sources.
For each objective:
community - education – employment – environment – financial – health – housing – social - urban
8
Some ROI evaluation frameworks/tools
Systems
Social Return on
Investment (SROI)
Authors /
Commentators
(Ravi and Reinhardt
2011)
Social accounting
Well-being valuation
analysis (WVA)
Social Impact Value
Calculator
(Fujiwara 2014)
Financial feasibility
analysis, post-occupancy
evaluation
Cost Benefit Analysis
(CBA)
(Milligan, Phibbs et
al. 2007)
Social Cost Benefit
Analysis
Cost consequence
analysis (CCA)
Cost effectiveness
evaluation (CEE)
(Campbell
Collaboration 2014)
(Parkinson, Ong et al.
2013), (Pawson,
Milligan et al. 2014)
(HM Treasury 2011)
(Parkinson, Ong et al.
2013), (Pawson,
Milligan et al. 2014)
(Parkinson, Ong et al.
2013), (Pawson,
Milligan et al. 2014)
Key Features
Maps the value of the work of an organisation by
placing monetary values on social outputs;
represented by a ratio of social gain from $1 of
investment
Approach to reporting - relates to the social,
environmental and financial impact which an
organisation has had - considers the extent to which an
organisation is meeting its (usually pre-determined)
social or ethical goals
Builds on cost-benefit & SROI analyses
UK examples, metrics and calculator available
Simple excel tool to provide support to apply the
values in the Social Value Bank to community
investment activities
Ratio of housing costs to value of housing benefits
Assess the net value of a policy or project to society as
a whole
Housing costs per tenant year
Disaggregated housing costs and tenant outcome
measures
9
Two tiered approach to ROI?
TIER 1 – SOCIAL RETURN ON INVESTMENT
(SROI)
Industry level ROI e.g. inform government
policy; service level agreements; social bonds
Method
Tools
Data
See Social
Value 2012
Guide to
Social Value
Invest
Other
This is a critical element. Issues
to be considered:
• Availability of data
• Comparability of data –
geographical, personal
• Time based
• Sectional data
• Statistical bias
• Frequency of data updates
Comprehensive
Outcomes & Indicator
set across nine domains:
Attribution or causal links
(plausible connection) to be
determined by expert panels for
each indicator, if possible.
Community
Economy
Education
Employment
Environment
Health & Well Being
Housing
Social
Urban Amenity
Self-reported well-being estimates impact of a service on
subjective well-being - then
calculates the amount of money
that would produce equivalent
impact
TIER 2 – WELL-BEING VALUATION ANALYSIS (WVA)
Agency level ROI e.g. service deliverer
Method
Self-reported wellbeing - estimates
impact on
subjective wellbeing – then
calculate the
amount of money
to produce
equivalent impact
Tools
Survey
templates Trotter, Vine et
al. 2014)
Calculation Tool
http://www.hact.
org.uk/valuecalculator
Data
10
Causal links and associations (1)
Butterfly Model of Health for an Ecosystem Context (VanLeeuwen, Waltner-Toews et al. 1999) 11
Causal links and associations (2)
The modified DPSEEA Model (Morris et al 2006 in (The Scottish Government 2008))
12
Determining when and what to invest to receive greatest return on/benefits from
investment ? – for example (outside current scope):
Manage
move from
support to
wage earner
For example:
chronic condition, long
term support likely
Or
Capacity for moving
along housing,
employment, education
continuum
Nature & Extent of support
Determine real cost
of delivery
$
Invest $X in
appropriate
service at key
time
Time line of support
Y$ benefit
in long
term
13
IMPACT MAPs – may be effective communication tool
From UK Cabinet Office SROI Guide 2009 – aligned with SBEnrc Projects 1.31 and 1.41
OUTCOMES &
INDICATORS
BUSINESS
INTEGRATION
ASSOCIATIONS
RETURN ON
INVESTMENT
LITERATURE ARC /
FINANCING SOCIAL
HOUSING /
Stakeholders
Inputs
Description
Financial proxy
Deadweight
•
•
•
•
•
•
Who do we have
an affect on?
Who has an effect
on us?
Outputs
•
Change
•
What do they
invest?
What do you think
will change for
them?
What is the value
of the inputs in
currency?
How would the
stakeholder
describe the
changes?
Indicator
•
How would you
measure it?
Source
•
Where did you get
the information
from?
What proxy would
you use to value
the change?
Value in currency
Displacement
•
•
What is the value
of the change?
Attribution
•
•
Where did you get
the information
from?
•
•
How much
change was
there?
ACROSS NINE DOMAINS :
community
economy
education
employment
Does the outcome
drop off in future
years?
Impact
•
How long does it
last after end of
activity?
Outcomes
•
Who else
contributed to the
change?
Drop off
Duration
Check Scottish and
Australian methods
What activity did
you displace?
Source
Quantity
•
What proxy would
you use to value
the change?
Quantity times
financial proxy,
less dead-weight,
displacement and
attribution
Does it start in
period of activity
(1) or in period
after (2)
environment
health &
well-being
housing
social
Urban
14
amenity
Valuing Social Housing - Case Studies
1. Data Sharing
• WA Dept of Housing & Access Housing (TBC)
2. Integration with performance and outcomes
based frameworks
• Qld Dept of Housing & Public Works,
• NSW Land and Housing Corp
• National Affordable Housing Consortium
15
NEXT STEPS - DATA , INFORMATION & KNOWLEDGE SHARING
UNDER DEVELOPMENT
COMMONWEALTH
STATE GOVERNMENT
LOCAL
GOVERNMENT
PROVIDER
PERSON / FAMILY
POLICY - Policy affecting supply and demand; quality control; flow on macroeconomic and
productivity impacts; fiscal considerations
DATA – Quantitative – ABS - population and housing; income and housing costs; health; investment;
disability and aging; demographics; occupancy; HILDA – income, labour market and family
dynamics; AURIN – health and wellbeing, economic and environmental
SERVICE IMPACTS -
POLICY – supply models ………..
DATA – Quantitative – Valuer General datasets re housing and neighbourhood characteristics and
value over time
SERVICE IMPACTS -
POLICY - Planning; services; community engagement
DATA – Quantitative
SERVICE IMPACTS -
POLICY DATA - Quantitative
SERVICE IMPACTS - Asset management; service management; tenant management
DATA – Qualitative ( integrate living knowledge)
SERVICE IMPACTS – health and well being; access to employment, education and health facilities;
social integration
16
NEXT STEPS - INTEGRATION WITH PERFORMANCE & OUTCOMES BASED
REPORTING
Longitudinal
data required
Across housing
&non-housing
outcomes
Identify relevant
outcomes &
indicators on a
cohort or case
by case basis
TENANT OUTCOMES
direct & indirect
impacts of secure
housing
MACROECONOMIC
BENEFITS
Of productivity
improvement & growth
FISCAL BENEFITS
Revenue increase
through increased
tenant engagement
NON-ECONOMIC
BENEFITS
Environment, resource
& social capital 17
THANK YOU
Full reports available at:
http://www.sbenrc.com.au/research-programs/1-31-rethinking-social-housingeffective-efficient-equitable-e3/
18