The Jigsaw

I have been lucky enough to be talking with a range of senior leaders about social housing data recently.

One of the key things that I have been pushing for is for data standards to be baked into new regulation and legislation at the earliest possible stage.

Its a simple premise, but let me explain why I believe its a good idea.

Firstly, Interpretation.

A new regulation comes out and everyone starts to interpret the meaning and approach to compliance in their own way. Systems and expertise vary across housing providers. So there are many different outcomes.

Secondly, Duplication.

Because regulation is not specified to explicit information requirements. Providers, software vendors and consultancies all undertaken similar activities to meet their interpretation of compliance. If each organisation spends £50,000 complying (we all know its likely to be much more in many cases). But that is a staggering 9 figure cost to the sector.

Thirdly, Rework.

Much of the work will be taken to comply in the grey period where there is not a common agreement on how to comply, but before enactment. This means that when a common agreement is reached or there are explicit requirements organisations need to change what they have done to comply.

The key tenets of Data Standards are around interoperability and common definitions and rules.

My colleague Rizwan N. uses a great analogy of a zebra being to some a black horse with white stripes and to others a white horse with black stripes. Imagine anything in housing like “voids” and “maisonettes”, where people have different interpretations.

An analogy that I like is of a massive jigsaw.

Each part needs to be perfectly aligned to fit together. This could be system connections, to reports, to information held in spreadsheets. If you consider your own organisation, you will see that your information does not fit well together. I have posted before about UPRNs. But that is really just the start.

To be honest, it would be helpful if there were some Data Standards available to the sector…. Oh wait a moment…

HACT started this in 2013 and released data standards between 2018-2022. Over 120 organisations including housing associations, local authorities and software vendors contributed to this initiative. These contributions were in knowledge, expertise, resources and financially.

HACT and Data Futurists have been commissioned by MHCLG to undertake a series of pilots looking at the adoption of these standards in the sector (there are a couple of places available and its free).

You may have seen Lincolnshire Housing Partnership leading the way with a certification against the United Kingdom Housing Association Data Standards (UKHDS).

I would ask for all housing providers to seek an audit and certification. This is the quickest and most affordable route to adoption.

This will help to show the level of adoption and groundswell of support here that will ultimately make the conversations with government policymakers more credible.

But also help to improve the standards themselves.

The Data Standards Index we have created forms part of the audit and solves the first two problems above. It allows us to create a specific gap analysis. The wider audit elements look at areas such as data literacy and processes to identify the structural elements in the organisation that need to be improved to sustain data against the standards. We believe the combination of these helps organisations to understand the actions they need to take. But act as a catalyst to improve data quality/governance overall.

As there are improvements coming to the standards themselves. The audits will act as stabilisers to organisations to maintain long-term alignment without the need for a permanent resource in that space.

It is a long road ahead to adoption. But this is a key element of Data Futurists mission to permanently fix data in Social Housing. Which is why we are proud to be working with HACT on this important topic. I will post links to data standard related items in the comments.

Comments:

Guy Marshall: This is a great post, and I completely agree that clearer definitions and shared data standards are essential if we want to avoid duplication, rework, and misinterpretation.
When it comes to data in Housing I keep finding problems with action. Yes, data integrity is foundational. Yes, compliance pressures already point us in this direction. Yes, there is a lot of important narrative (including the Better Social Homes Review) that support the necessity and urgency of this work. But, this feels as much a leadership and board awareness and capability issue as it is a technical one. Either there isn’t awareness of the importance, it isn’t being prioritised by leadership or there is a skill gap somewhere. As you point out, the standards have been around for a decade already.

Rizwan N: Unlike banking or manufacturing, social housing providers don’t often share data with each other, so the usual STP-style drivers aren’t as strong. However if we approach from an operational point of view, data standards still brings real value: different teams use different systems thus standards reduce duplication, errors, and manual reconciliation; regulatory reporting – makes it quicker and easier to produce accurate returns and respond to audits; shared structures give providers more leverage with suppliers and make system upgrades or integrations smoother; easier to compare performance across the sector and share best practice when data is structured similarly. So while the driver isn’t constant external data sharing, the benefits are still significant, especially for improving services and cutting waste.

Dave Skinner: There are massive pieces or work underway across the sector to restructure and understand data that has been passed from system to system (to excel) to system for decades. All using different structures. It’s also not a bad thing that the sector starts to create standards for vendors to adhere to. It builds transparency and gives some of the power back to housing providers with regards to their tech.