TY - RPRT AU - Milligan, Vivienne AU - Martin, Chris AU - Phillips, Rhonda AU - Liu, Edgar AU - Pawson, Hal AU - Spinney, Angela CY - Melbourne DO - doi:10.18408/ahuri-7108401 KW - Australia's affordable housing industry, capacity, capacity-building, industry development L1 - internal-pdf://0158803863/AHURI_Final_Report_No268_Profiling Australia's.pdf M1 - 71084 M3 - FR N1 - The first of two reports focussing on the affordable housing industry and housing options for lower income households. The research found key gaps in industry infrastructure such as shortcomings in policy-making capacities and regulation. Growth opportunities to promote further capacity development and strategic investment were also identified. This study examined the affordable housing industry’s current profile and capacity. The industry comprises non-government (for-profit and not-for-profit) affordable housing providers; and the institutional entities and individuals that enable, support and regulate the work of affordable housing providers. Providers range from commercial style operators to tenancy managers with organisational capacity closely aligned to scale and business interests. Capacity is characterised by the resources to do the work; appropriate organisational and workforce capability; industry specific skills, effective networks and political influence. Summary of key findings: • In March 2016 there were 323 registered community housing entities. The regulated industry comprised: o 40 commercially oriented entities that raise private finance, procure their own housing and offer diversified housing services. Most within this group have organisational capability to accommodate further expansion and to develop their own future capacity under an industry growth and development plan. They now account for an estimated 80 per cent of the long term affordable housing under the industry’s control. This study surveyed 17 of these providers which had on average of 2,000 dwellings under management and $20m in rent revenue. o 72 providers who have limited housing development and asset management experience. Those surveyed (30) had an average asset portfolio of less than 400 dwellings and $2m in rent revenue. o A remainder of over 200 providers who are generally small and specialised, often within a single locality. • Most of the larger providers have engaged in an intensive capacity-building phase over the past decade. The development of national community housing regulation has stimulated organisational capacity building within the industry, particularly among the cohort of smaller providers. • The larger providers seek growth opportunities for their businesses, e.g. through new funding sources, partnerships and mergers, however steady growth is a challenge with policy uncertainty (changes to subsidy arrangements and pending large scale public housing transfers) and no national industry plan. • Indigenous-run community housing organisations (ICHOs) and community housing assets overall have declined however still represent a significant portfolio of over 27,000 identified Indigenous dwellings that provide a substantial resource for strengthening and growing Indigenous community housing. • Growth opportunities and capacity-building strategies for ICHOs have been limited in recent years with the transfer of responsibility for Indigenous housing to the states/territories including a policy regime that has promoted mainstreaming, and the decrease in Indigenous institutions and supporting infrastructure, serving to limit the operating scale of ICHOs and contributing to poor viability. • Key gaps in industry infrastructure include the absence of: clear and consistent government and industry leadership; specialist and reliable capacity within governments to steer and monitor policy outcomes; a core industry data set and a financial intermediary to harness private investment. NV - UNSW PB - Australian Housing and Urban ÂþÌìÌÃÈë¿Ú Institute Limited PY - 2016 RP - The first of two reports focussing on the affordable housing industry and housing options for lower income households. The research found key gaps in industry infrastructure such as shortcomings in policy-making capacities and regulation. Growth opportunities to promote further capacity development and strategic investment were also identified. This study examined the affordable housing industry’s current profile and capacity. The industry comprises non-government (for-profit and not-for-profit) affordable housing providers; and the institutional entities and individuals that enable, support and regulate the work of affordable housing providers. Providers range from commercial style operators to tenancy managers with organisational capacity closely aligned to scale and business interests. Capacity is characterised by the resources to do the work; appropriate organisational and workforce capability; industry specific skills, effective networks and political influence. Summary of key findings: • In March 2016 there were 323 registered community housing entities. The regulated industry comprised: o 40 commercially oriented entities that raise private finance, procure their own housing and offer diversified housing services. Most within this group have organisational capability to accommodate further expansion and to develop their own future capacity under an industry growth and development plan. They now account for an estimated 80 per cent of the long term affordable housing under the industry’s control. This study surveyed 17 of these providers which had on average of 2,000 dwellings under management and $20m in rent revenue. o 72 providers who have limited housing development and asset management experience. Those surveyed (30) had an average asset portfolio of less than 400 dwellings and $2m in rent revenue. o A remainder of over 200 providers who are generally small and specialised, often within a single locality. • Most of the larger providers have engaged in an intensive capacity-building phase over the past decade. The development of national community housing regulation has stimulated organisational capacity building within the industry, particularly among the cohort of smaller providers. • The larger providers seek growth opportunities for their businesses, e.g. through new funding sources, partnerships and mergers, however steady growth is a challenge with policy uncertainty (changes to subsidy arrangements and pending large scale public housing transfers) and no national industry plan. • Indigenous-run community housing organisations (ICHOs) and community housing assets overall have declined however still represent a significant portfolio of over 27,000 identified Indigenous dwellings that provide a substantial resource for strengthening and growing Indigenous community housing. • Growth opportunities and capacity-building strategies for ICHOs have been limited in recent years with the transfer of responsibility for Indigenous housing to the states/territories including a policy regime that has promoted mainstreaming, and the decrease in Indigenous institutions and supporting infrastructure, serving to limit the operating scale of ICHOs and contributing to poor viability. • Key gaps in industry infrastructure include the absence of: clear and consistent government and industry leadership; specialist and reliable capacity within governments to steer and monitor policy outcomes; a core industry data set and a financial intermediary to harness private investment. SN - 268 ST - Profiling Australia's affordable housing industry T2 - ÂþÌìÌÃÈë¿ÚFinal Report No. 268 TI - Profiling Australia's affordable housing industry UR - http://www.ahuri.edu.au/research/final-reports/268 ID - 759 ER -