Social housing providers are failing to demonstrate their social value, placing too great a focus on financial metrics, according to a recent sector survey.
The research, conducted by Social Housing in partnership with global accountancy firm Mazars, revealed that nearly 80 per cent of organisations believe that the sector is not doing enough when it comes to demonstrating social value.
Meanwhile, more than 80 per cent of respondents – including directors, managers and officers from housing associations and local authorities – said the sector is focusing too much on financial value and not enough on social impact.
Respondents were also divided over the ways in which they measure social value, which looks at the non-financial impacts the organisation has, especially on the well-being of individuals, communities and the environment.
More than 40 per cent said they use their own measures to quantify social value, while almost one in five said they utilise HACT’s Wellbeing Valuation approach. Other approaches include the National Housing Federation’s Local Economic Impact Calculator, the Sector Scorecard and the Cabinet Office’s Social Return on Investment (SROI).
The results have shone a light on what some would say is a growing imbalance within the sector between financial and social value, and the importance that is placed on the two by individual organisations.
Coming at a time of increased awareness of social value post-Grenfell, this research also raises questions about whether increased focus on financial metrics could result in organisations making decisions that are not always better for the tenant.
Echoing this challenge – and despite the inherent not-for-profit nature of the sector that sees it reinvest surpluses – one survey respondent says: “There is too much focus on financial gain [as] opposed to the well-being of residents. We know affordable rent for the majority is not affordable. This is further [exacerbated] by increasing service charges and the inability to have repairs carried out in a timely manner or in some cases, at all. Housing bodies need to do more [and] this quite possibly may need to be enforced by governance.”
Another respondent says: “The commercial priorities, especially of private finance, are increasingly crowding out any social ambitions of providers.”
The survey follows a report by Mazars – Rethinking Social Value – which highlighted similar challenges around defining and measuring social value, particularly at a time when public spending is constrained and organisations are having to find new ways of unlocking resources to improve people’s lives.
A deeper dig into the survey results shows that the reasons given for the sector’s struggle to demonstrate social value are mixed. Many respondents say that the sector can do more to boost communication and PR in this area.
Others, meanwhile, point out the complexities around measuring social value and the impact this has on the sector when it comes to demonstrating how they are achieving it, including calls for a “usable, consistent and widely adopted methodology for measuring and reporting” social value, as well as multiple requests for increased transparency.
Customer satisfaction, though, was by far the most frequently cited metric. Most of the respondents say they validate this through surveys and some stress that the surveys must be independent.
Interestingly, the findings show that the respondents are more in favour of embracing league tables than not (44 per cent in favour, compared with 36 per cent who say no, and 19 per cent who say they do not know).
In other words, by engaging and including stakeholders in the reporting process, both the organisation and its tenants would be better off.
