Notting Hill Housing residents meet tonight over merger plans

Huge turnout at Genesis/Notting Hill HA merger tenants' meeting

Genesis marketing of Brent House

I hear that there was a great turnout at yesterday's meeting about the proposed merger of Genesis and Notting Hill Housing associations with the church venue unable to hold all the tenants and leaseholders wishing to attend.

There was vociferous opposition to the merger plans with many seeing this as a turn away from a social enterprise model towards a profit-making business model which would result in property sales, higher rents, lack of security and building for market rather than affordable prices.

In a vote at the end of the meeting there were more than 100 votes against the merger and none for.

I hope to carry more detailed information later.

See more about the Notting Hill Housing chief's 'embrace of the market' HERE

Statement on the merger by Genesis and Notting Hill Housing (July 20th)

Notting Hill Housing and Genesis Housing Association have agreed in principle to merge, a move that would create one of the country's largest housing associations.

The boards of both organisations agreed the merger proposal yesterday (Wednesday 19 July), which they felt was the best decision for both businesses, their residents, their shareholders and for London and the South East.

The new organisation, Notting Hill Genesis, will have 54,000 homes across London and 64,000 across London and the South East, half of which will be general needs homes with social or affordable rents.

The new organisation will serve a total of 170,000 residents and be the largest provider of shared ownership tenure in the country.

Financially, this merger will bring together two substantial organisations to make a new and stronger entity. We have combined reserves of £3.1 billion and loan facilities of £3.5 billion. We are generating turnover of about £700m and a net surplus of more than £120 million. This financial strength will enable the delivery of around 2,700 new homes a year, 400 more than would be achievable separately.

Both organisations believe passionately that their shared heritage makes this a good match. Both Notting Hill Housing and Genesis Housing were founded in different forms during the 1960s by people of faith in west London, with the aim of housing the working poor and giving them a secure home with which to build their future.

While both evolved over time, building significant commercial interests and merging with others, the core purpose remains unchanged: to provide quality homes to low income households across London and beyond.

Dipesh J. Shah OBE, from Genesis, is Chair Designate of the new organisation. Paul Hodgkinson, from Notting Hill Housing, had recently extended his term of office to oversee the transition to merger, but never intended to remain past that point.

Kate Davies from Notting Hill Housing has been named Chief Executive Designate, with Elizabeth Froude, currently Genesis Deputy Chief Executive and Executive Director of Resources, being appointed Deputy Chief Executive Designate.

Notting Hill Genesis Chair Designate, Dipesh Shah, said: “Uniting two associations with a common culture, a common vision and an aspiration to enrich their social purpose augurs well for the future of the merged entity. I look forward very much to being part of it and to helping the new organisation on its journey.”

Kate Davies, Chief Executive Designate, said: “Bringing together two housing associations with similar backgrounds, shared values and a strong social purpose will allow us to provide more of the homes London needs, for those who most need them.

“This is an exciting challenge for all of us and I’m very much looking forward to leading this new organisation, which has the will and resources to be even more innovative, ambitious and influential together than we could separately.”

In line with the commitment to a merger of equals, Neil Hadden decided not to apply for the role of Chief Executive (Designate) of Notting Hill Genesis, due to the fact that Dipesh was appointed Chair (Designate).  Neil will remain as Genesis Chief Executive until the merger is complete in early 2018.

Genesis Chief Executive Neil Hadden added: “I have always believed that there should be more consolidation within the sector so that our capacity can be utilised better to provide more homes and improved services for our customers. To that end, this merger makes complete sense and I am pleased to have been involved in getting it off the ground. I look forward to continuing to lead Genesis until the merger is complete in early 2018.”

Deputy Chief Executive Designate, Elizabeth Froude, said: "I am very pleased to be taking up this role in what will be a fantastic organisation, built on the legacy of two housing associations with deep and common roots and purpose. We will take the best of both to allow us to continue to deliver a good service to our many and diverse customer groups, in the ever complex environment in which we operate.

"I believe this merger will bring us the resilience to be innovative in how we adapt our services to meet the demands of our current and future customers."

Genesis & Notting Hill Housing merger threat to residents - 16th August meeting

MEETING FOR ALL RESIDENTS OF NOTTING HILL HOUSING AND GENESIS HA.

All residents very welcome - tenants, shared owners and leaseholders.

WEDNESDAY 16 AUGUST 2017

6:30-8:30 pm

Westbourne Grove Church

Westbourne Grove

London, W11 2RW

(The venue has wheel chair access)

From Genesis Residents

What are the real reasons for the proposed merger of Notting Hill Housing and Genesis Housing Association? Why are the 170,000 NHH and Genesis residents worried.  Genesis Residents explain:

-->

Why are these housing associations merging?

So that the merged H.A can borrow more money on the private money markets to build homes which are out-of-reach for ordinary people. Both housing associations have lost sight of their original purpose.

In 2016 the National Housing Federation, the HA bosses association, said (1) that rental income is central for ,“raising private debt in order to build more homes”. Service charges and ‘management charges’ on maintenance work for leaseholders and shared owners also increase income and allow HAs to raise more private debt.

Increasing income (from rents, service charges and management charges on repairs) and a bigger asset base (our homes) means more loans for out-of-reach housing. It has very little do with protecting homes or ending the housing crisis.

In 2016 Genesis funded a report (2) by a ‘think tank’ set up by extremist conservative MPs which called for the government to give H.As a ‘deal’ – to build more out-of-reach homes based on increasing H.A debt to 60% debt and forcing up rents.  Part of the deal was also that the H.As could sell their existing housing. Although lip service was paid to ‘rent caps’, HAs would be able charge whatever rent they wanted:

“Government would give the housing associations signing up complete discretion over the use of the social housing grant from housing asset sales and allow the housing associations to set their own rents for its social housing tenants.”

Neither HA has been honest with residents about the real reasons for the merger – or the likely consequences.

What will this mean for our rents and service charges?

We are concerned that there is a long term agenda to raise rents or get tenants out, to sell properties on.

What is happening is shown by Genesis’ attitude to older ‘secure tenants’. The rents for these pre-1989 tenancies are currently uncapped. Despite the fact that all 2,000 of them are retired, or nearing retirement, usually on fixed savings or pensions, Genesis has been raising their rents by up to 177%.

As Kate Davies said (3) in 2008, “housing associations should be free to use new social housing, and existing social housing…as they see fit” (our emphasis). The new Housing and Planning Act 2016 allows H.A.s to end much of the protection for residents including their rents ( a process sometimes called ‘deregulation’).

In other words the terms of tenancies, including rent, are under attack. Service and other charges may also go up with the pressure to fund more building. Neil Hadden said in an interview (4) in 2015 that Genesis was:

“really looking at our asset base and seeing what the value of that is and how we can get our hands on that value, by changing its tenure, by churning it, by selling it and using those proceeds to build more homes.” 

So there appears to be a serious conflict of interest between the interests of current residents and the drive to increase the income of Genesis and Notting Hill’s (and therefore the new merged HA) by any means.

College fraud a test case for mergers scrutiny

-->

The Guardian in its recent editorial LINK on the Government's newly introduced Apprentice Levy stated:

The biggest flaw is that, like so many other government initiatives, this latest attempt to boost the number of apprenticeships could have been designed to be gamed. Experience has surely shown by now that setting a target, generating the cash, and launching the scheme before systems of monitoring and assessment are up and running is an open invitation for employers to cheat.

I can reveal that a KMPG report into the College fraud has exposed serious deficiencies in the so called tightened monitoring system LINK in place, and in my view, provided sufficient evidence backing up the Guardian Opinion of 17 April April 2017 

The KPMG report which focused on the apprenticeship training provided (or rather, it appears, not provided) by Keyrail LINK was limited in scope and provided 'for information purposes only', however, beneath the bland account's language, KPMG reveal some pretty devastating deficiencies: 

•   Despite assurances that due diligence had been performed and a contract given to Keyrail Training Solutions for signing KPMG had been unable to find the majority of due diligence paper work or a signed contract

•   An increase in approved apprentice numbers from 20 to 90  was not underpinned by documentation or risk assessment

•   Learner evidence was requested from Keyrail but was delayed or not completed meaning the the College failed to comply with Skills Funding Agency's funding rules regarding ongoing monitoring

•   The College did not have a formal policy regarding monitoring of subcontractors prior to July 2015.

•   Out of a total of learner 40 files reviewed KPMG considered all were ineligible for funding as there were multiple compliance issues, including no achievement evidence

•   Of the 79 apprentices for whom funding was claimed, only 7 were recognised by the employer with whom they were supposed to be placed, Specialised Engineering Services Limited (SES)

KPMG summarise by stating they did not see sufficient evidence to demonstrate that valid learning took place in relation to the Keyrail apprentices
 
The Report went on to observe the following risks:

The College’s current subcontractor procedures are insufficient to demonstrate            compliance with the SFA overall subcontracting requirements.

The College is unable to demonstrate compliance with the SFA overall subcontracting requirements.

The College is unable to demonstrate it complies with the SFA Selection and Procurement and Entering into a subcontract rules and requirements

The College has reduced assurance over the completeness and accuracy of enrolment documentation relating to subcontracted provision. This increases the potential for errors within the subcontracted population on the ILR not being identified. In turn, this could detrimentally affect the College’s funding claim should enrolment issues be identified by any external audit of the College’s ILR

The College is unable to demonstrate sufficient controls over the monitoring of apprenticeship subcontracted provision. The inability to determine the level of outstanding review/contact evidence for all apprenticeship subcontracted learners increases the risk of ‘gaps’ in a learners on-programme activity and therefore the risk of an incomplete and inaccurate ILR, resulting in a misstatement of the College’s funding claim. This will directly impact on the College’s decision making process over the determination of monthly payments to its subcontractors. 

 If a learner is not registered or incorrect registered, then the College is at risk of not being able to substantiate a learner achievement. This will impact on any achievement funding claimed, as well as success rates.

The College is unable to demonstrate it complies with the SFA Monitoring of Subcontractors rules and requirements, and has increased risk of data completeness and accuracy issues relating to subcontracted provision

The College is unable to demonstrate it complies with the SFA Fees and Charges rules and requirements

The College is unable to demonstrate it complies with the SFA Monitoring of Subcontractors rules and requirements.

In addition, as KMPG only had available documentation going back to March 2015, it made further comments as to the implication of what it found having looked at the available documentation. However, because of the lack of documentation it was unable make recommendations:

During the course of the substantive testing, a number of observations have been identified which are recorded below. No recommendations are made to the College as Keyrail ceased trading in May 2016. The documentation retained by the College in relation to Keyrail is considered as final as there is no scope for additional evidence to be provided.

1.     Where learners are enrolled onto apprenticeship programmes that do not meet the funding eligible rules and criteria, all funding claimed is deemed ineligible

2.     There is a risk that funding claimed and/or data held in the ILR cannot be substantiated to underlying records

3.    There is a risk that where no underlying records are retained, funding claimed is deemed ineligible

4.    Where underlying records are incomplete or potentially contradictory, there is a risk that the learners English and maths enrolments on the ILR cannot be substantiated

5.    There is a risk that the funding claimed is not supported by documentation signed by the learner.

6.    There is a risk that the funding claimed is not supported by underlying records

CNWL made total payments to Keyrail for what appears to be non existent apprenticeship training of £214,572. The College discovered in early summer 2016 that the company had been dissolved.

One learner in a College telephone interview in April 2016 put it succinctly:

The course no longer going on and this was all a scam. The staff forced to go in and do the course; if not they were sacked (sic). 

In a further twist, highlighting the growing concern over apprenticeship, UCU at its annual congress adopted a resolution calling for an apprenticeship charter LINK

The TES quoted Peter Monaghan, regional secretary of the UCU Eastern and Home Counties Committee:

Certainly I would support the fact that apprenticeships shouldn’t be at the expense of a wider, broader curriculum, most definitely...and also I would say the key to the success of apprenticeships in the future is our involvement, not employers’ involvement, our involvement as unionists and educators. 

In my view, the UCU Congress motion on Apprentice charter as well as Guardian leader comment, lends strong support to the UCU branch at the College who are calling for an independent public enquiry into the admitted subcontractor fraud LINK

Backing the unanimous decision of his branch members for an independent inquiry, Indro Sen, suspended Branch Secretary at CNWL, said.
 

When students are 10 minutes late, managers instruct the class teachers to monitor their attendance. When teachers do not cross the "t) and  dot the"i" in their marked work, they are monitored by their managers and some end up under capability procedures, but when a fraud as large as £356K can take place under the very nose of SFA auditors, borough police chief, Governors and senior management teams, who monitors their performance?

Only an independent public enquiry can get to the bottom of this. Can any students' life chances be said to be in safe hands unless each and every sub-contractor is thoroughly checked out on the Government declared Sub contractor list and those checks are made public for students to see what they are getting into. Until such time, Mr. Boles should consider putting the levy scheme into abeyance.

It is not known how SFA and the college have reacted  to this call for an independent public inquiry, however, it is clear the KMPG report itself is not such an inquiry.  It is to be hoped that CWC undertook due diligence prior to the merger decision.

Greening would be wise to delve a little deeper into the merger between College of North West London and City of Westminster, before rubber stamping it. LINK   If she did so, she would only be carrying out her boss, May's manifesto promise of greater scrutiny over mergers, a bit earlier and proactively. This related to commercial mergers but should also apply to corporations as they move closer to commercial models.

Brent Council to expand & merge schools & seek free school partners to tackle places crisis

The Brent Cabinet will tomorrow consider the School Place Planning Strategy 2014-18. It includes the above actions and the following schemes:

Expansion of the following schools in 2015 at a cost of £19.5m:

• Byron Court Primary to increase by two forms of entry (2 additional classes in each age group)
• Leopold Primary school to increase by two forms of entry on the site of the Gwenneth Rickus Building in Brentfield Road (2 additional classes in each age group)
• Oakington Manor Primary to increase by one form of entry (one additional class in each age group)

Amalgamations of the following separate infant and junior schools into all-through primary schools. It should be noted that the second two  involve expansion as well as amalgamation and in the Kilburn case a new building. This is a significant challenge to headteachers in terms of disruption.:

• Lyon Park Infants and Juniors (currently operating under one  headteacher)
• Carlton Vale Infants and Kilburn Park Juniors (subject to agreement on a suitable shared site for an expanded school in the South Kilburn regeneration area)
• Malorees Infants and Malorees Junior  (subject to agreement by the governing bodies of both schools to amalgamation and expansion)

 The Cabinet will also consider the use of a former school site in The Avenue, Brondesbury for educational use. The site is currently owned by a developer. The site could potentially be used for SEN provision.

The report notes that proposed free schools in the borough will potentially provided a total of 10 forms of entry for primary pupils and 9.3 for secondary pupils in the 2014-18 period.

The report notes:

....to be funded directly by the Education Funding Agency (EVA) at no cost to the council. There is a risk to the council that if all of these places are not provided via this route that the council will need to provide places  and fund the associated expenditure.

This September both Gateway and Gladstone secondary free schools failed to open despite recruiting pupils.

The council's policy to seek free school partners (Action 5 above) will be controversial in the light of problems associated with free schools not opening on time, having fewer pupils than designated so provided at considerable expense, and often without the backers having a proven track.

The report can be found HERE and the full Strategy HERE