Phase Two: For clients, contractors & residents
As the sector continues to wrestle with damp and mould, and is now gearing up for Phase 2 of Awaab’ s Law, coming into force on 30th November, Paul Smith( Head of Frameworx) and Neil Watts( Managing Director of London & South East Responsive Maintenance at Axis CLC) discuss how main contractors are working in partnership with their clients, exploring what has changed, what still needs to change, and what residents should be able to expect from their housing provider and its supply chain.
Paul Smith: What would you say has been the biggest difference between how you thought about Phase One as a client and how you are approaching Phase Two as a contractor?
Neil Watts:“ Phase One was a necessary shift for the sector. It was all new, and there was a real deep dive into what it meant operationally, particularly for clients.
As a client during that time, we focused on reinforcing the ownership of the process and how important the data is to ensure we are complying, ensuring the resident was at the heart of our decisions. When It comes to damp and mould cases, the triaging process is critical. With so many system changes happening at once, it would be very easy to have a job raised and let it fall into a normal repairs cycle and therefore not meeting the requirements of the new legislation. More than that, Damp and mould cannot simply be treated as a repair. It needs a wide understanding of the property and the resident’ s circumstances to ensure the problem is dealt with properly.
“ This is where the data comes in. We set up a dedicated, specialist triage team, with a strong focus on data to support fast decision making.
“ From my now contractor side, that data is important too. Receiving the right information early, on cases that have been triaged correctly before it reaches us, means we can deal with the right issues quickly. We do not want to be the reason an issue escalates. I have seen clients where vulnerability flags disproportionately high, this can contribute to the focus being diluted, and stops us focusing on the properties with the greater needs.
“ When you look at the data holistically, you move away from one job in, to one job out, and realise for example, a block with twenty open jobs for a leak is often one roof or one pipe, not twenty separate problems. By utilising data through predictive modelling, you get a better understanding of the building performance.”
Paul Smith: Is there one piece of advice you wish you could give your client-side self, now that you are on the contractor side?
Neil Watts:“ There are two, really. The first is standardise the approach. Interestingly, only four of our twenty-seven clients are speaking to us in any depth about Phase Two, and they are all approaching this slightly differently. I would love to see a standardised approach to the surveys, the information collected and the timescales, although even that varies because different clients want us to attend quicker than the legislation requires, and I do not blame them for that.
“ The second is competency and training. It is all very well ticking a box to get out there on time, but the repair has to be fit for purpose and sustainable. By training teams and increasing competency, triaging correctly, and making sure the client has that blocklevel view of their properties as well as the individual job view, we are better equipped to deliver a right first time repair.
“ Emergencies are expensive as they are an inefficient way of delivering a service and don’ t fit with the pricing models on some contracts. Our forecasting suggests emergency call-outs could rise by ten to twenty per cent depending on how they are triaged, and that has a direct impact on resourcing and cost.”
Paul Smith: Do you think the traditional client and contractor repairs model is still fit for purpose, or does it need to evolve, particularly with Phase Three still to come?
Neil Watts:“ There needs to be a seismic shift: from a model that separates client, contractor and resident, to one team sharing data and risk with resource ring-fenced with a focus on the resident’ s needs.
“ Measuring jobs raised, completed and closed is not enough; It has to be based on