This Positioning Paper is the initial output of the research project being undertaken by the AHURI Southern Research Centre to review the utility of Tenant Incentive Schemes for Australia’s State and Territory Housing Authorities (SHAs). The current environment of declining revenue budgets and changing tenant profile has encouraged SHAs to pursue innovation in policy and service delivery to achieve their objectives. Examples of such innovation include the fostering of mixed development schemes, public/private partnerships and tenant empowerment strategies. Tenant Incentive Schemes have been proposed as a further addition to that list. This research project is designed to provide a timely, evidence based contribution to the discussion of their practicality and appropriateness for the Australian public housing sector.
Recently, there has been a growing interest in the development of housing management schemes that reward public housing tenants who fulfil their tenancy obligations by offering an additional tier of benefits to those normally supplied by the landlord. The generic term to describe these schemes is ‘Tenant Incentive Schemes’ (TIS). Examples of TIS benefits include rent discounts, accelerated repair and maintenance services, shopping and leisure centre vouchers and insurance discounts. Though TIS are at an early stage of development in Australia they have been used in the UK and are claimed as a major factor in the improvements achieved by some housing organisations in their performance outputs such as rent collection rates, vacancy turnover and tenant satisfaction surveys. As this Positioning Paper reports, UK housing organisations who have established TIS assert that once start up costs have been met, TIS can result in considerable cost savings, lead to improvements in staff morale and help foster an enhanced commitment from tenants towards their home and neigh bourhood. The major pioneer and promoter of TIS in the UK is Irwell Valley Housing Association (IVHA), a medium sized association based in Manchester. Their TIS, entitled ‘Gold Star Service’ (Gold Star), has been a prototype for schemes adopted by at least 40 UK housing organisations as well as housing organisations in the Netherlands (Housing Today: 2003).
This Positioning Paper examines the Tenant Incentive Schemes that have been established by IVHA and other UK housing organisations. It considers how far, and at what cost, they have achieved their stated objectives, namely to enhance the landlord/tenant relationship and to reward tenants who maintain their conditions of tenancy. It then introduces a discussion of their transferability to the Australian public housing sector. This discussion will be concluded in the Final Report in the light of findings from the empirical component of the research project.
Chapter One introduces the Positioning Paper and discusses some of the key ideological debates that shape contemporary housing management practice. Chapter Two highlights current Australian housing management practices, showing how State Housing Authorities (SHAs), despite operating within tight budgets, seek to counter the effects of residualisation. Their strategies address tenant participation, allocations, anti social behaviour, rent recovery, repairs and vacancy turnover. Chapter Three outlines the use of TIS by IVHA and other UK housing organisations. Chapter Four summarises the existing incentive schemes currently employed by State and Territory housing authorities in Australia. Chapter Five describes the methodology for the empirical stage of the research project when interviews and focus groups with SHA personnel and tenants in New South Wales Queensland and Tasmania will explore the potential for TIS in the Australian context. Finally Chapter Six provides a conclusion in which the main themes within the report are addressed. Subsequent research outputs (the Final Report and Research and Policy Bulletin) will set out the empirical findings of the project.
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Context
2 CONTEMPORARY HOUSING MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN AUSTRALIA
2.1 Public housing policy objectives
2.2 Housing management approaches and indirect tenant incentives
- - Maintain public areas
- Request SHA to respond to problem
- Serve eviction notice
2.3 Summary
3 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
3.1 Tenant Incentives in the United Kingdom
3.2 Assessing the effectiveness of TIS
3.3 Transferability of UK Tenant Incentive Schemes
3.4 Evaluating Tenant Incentive Schemes
3.5 International Literature (USA, NZ and The Netherlands)
3.6 Summary
4 STATE AND TERRITORY HOUSING AUTHORITY POLICIES
4.1 Western Australia
4.2 South Australia
4.3 Northern Territory
4.4 ACT
4.5 Tasmania
4.6 New South Wales
4.7 Victoria
4.8 Queensland
4.9 Summary
5 NEXT STEPS
5.1 Aims and Objectives
5.2 Gaps in Knowledge
5.3 Methodology
5.4 Scoping the Potential of TIS
5.5 Data Analysis
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
Download
PDF Ebook A review of housing management tenant incentive schemes
