q4 / annual performance report - toronto …...performance report > q4/annual 2015 status against...

Q4 / Annual Performance Report

Performance Report > Q4/Annual 2015

...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2

2015 Performance Report Board Meeting April 27, 2016

How to Use this Report

The report is divided into three sections which align with the strategic priorities in our 2015 Corporate Goals:

Within each priority, there are a series of strategies that are noted as, for example, 1.2, where “1” is the strategic priority and “2” is the second strategy in that priority.

There are metrics associated with each strategy. Some metrics are reported on a quarterly basis and others are reported on an annual basis and they are identified accordingly.

This report is considered to be a work in progress. Metrics, formats and definitions may change from time to time as more information and data become available.

For more information or to request this report in an accessible format, contact [email protected].

mailto:[email protected]


Status against target Trend from last reported *Frequency of reporting: Q = Quarterly; A = Annual Appendix: Please refer to the definitions starting on page 47 for terms used in this report.

Exceed or within 5% 10% + variance / Positive / Negative up

5-10% variance Not applicable / Positive / Negative down

Scorecard Quarterly and Annual Performance Measures

Goal Measure Q/A* Target Result Status Last

reported Trend Page

Quality Homes

1 Generate Capital Stability Funds raised from sale of houses (YTD) Q $18M $18M Q3, $4.2M 6

Mortgage refinancing A $200M $200M 2014, $35M 6

2 Deliver an Innovative Capital Improvement Program

Capital program - actual completion (YTD) Q $175M $173M Q3, $90M 7

SOGR repairs underway (YTD) Q $15M $18M Q3, $8.5M 8

$ allocated for Participatory Budgeting projects A $8M $7.6M 2014, $5M 9

3 Grow the Revitalization Program

Total value of revitalization projects planned, under design, and construction

Q - $2.2B

Q3, $2.2B - 10

Vibrant Communities

4 Support Vulnerable Residents Residents connected to services (YTD) Q 900 957

Q3, 719 14

5 Renew our Resident Engagement System

Residents engaged in opportunities A 1,600 6,095

2014, 4,376 15

Improve Community Safety Total crime and incidents reported (YTD) Q - 38,984

Q3, 9,790 - 18

Evictions for cause Q - 8 Q3, 9 - 19

Service Excellence

6 Develop our People Qualitative metrics only - - - - - 19

7 Be a Landlord of Excellence

Maintenance request response service level Q 80% 65% Q3, 65% - 20

Client Care Centre – tenant calls service level Q 90% 39%

Q3, 49% 22

CSU Dispatch Centre – abandonment rate Q 8% 8.2% Q3, 7.8% 25

Percent of total arrears managed Q 80% 81% Q3, 80% 26

Value of accessibility improvements completed A $6.5M $4M 2014, $2.5M 28

8 Improve Resident Satisfaction Overall resident satisfaction rating (from 2015 Resident Survey)

Bi-ennial

75% 64% 2012, 68% 29

9 Ensure Long-Term Financial Sustainability

Vacancy loss overall Q $1.5M $2M

Q3, $1.9M 31

Routine turnover completed within targets Q 90% 54%

Q3, 43% 32

Procurement cost avoidance (YTD) Q $18M $41M Q3, $34M 33

Commercial revenue growth rate A 3% 3% 2014, 4% 34

Communications News media impact score Q 0.00 0.53 Q3, 0.00 35


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4

Executive Summary: Q4/Annual Performance The Quarterly Performance Report (“QPR”) to the Board is produced following the end of each quarter. It is aligned with the 2015 Corporate Goals and 2013-2015 Strategic Plan as approved by the Board, and is designed to provide high-level output-focused performance information on services provided by Toronto Community Housing. This report presents results for Q4 and annual performance results for 2015. Of the 57 measures in this report for which we have set targets or against which we track variances, just over half have exceeded their targets (reaching a “green” status), or attained them within 5%. At the end of 2015, all of our Quality Homes measures have exceeded their targets or attained them within 5%. We grew the State of Good Repair fund by $200M through the refinancing of mortgages with Infrastructure Ontario and by an additional $18M through the sale of 20 single-family homes. We completed a total of $173M in capital repairs with $3M saved in staffing efficiencies. Over $7.6M has been allocated to resident-identified capital repairs priorities through the Participatory Budgeting program. The revitalization program showed steady progress throughout 2015, maintaining a planning, design and construction pipeline valued at $2.2B. 118 new rent-geared-to-income and affordable rental units and 414 market condominium units were delivered this year, and sales of market units continued to grow on all marketing projects with total sales of 1,019 units. Under the Vibrant Communities priority, we developed three new dedicated on-site partnerships at Pelham Park Gardens, 100 High Park, and Dan Harrison to support residents in maintaining successful tenancies. We addressed over 1,800 new files from vulnerable residents. We engaged over 6,000 residents this year through a variety of initiatives such as the tenant representative elections, leadership building programs for youth, and community building conferences. We also granted 94 scholarships to young leaders through a partnership with Scadding Court Community Centre.

53%

3%

44%

Performance Report Measures

Exceed or within5% of target

5-10% variancefrom target

10%+ variancefrom target


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5

Several areas under the Service Excellence priority have shown improvement over performance in 2014, even though there is still much room for improvement. The service levels in the Client Care Centre fluctuated throughout the year, but the key performance indicators for 2015 overall have improved from last year. Similarly, the CSU dispatch centre achieved lower abandonment rates in 2015 than in 2014. Procurement cost avoidance achieved an 85% increase from 2014, and commercial revenue grew by 3% over 2014 actuals as targeted. Services levels for administrative and maintenance requests dropped in Q4, and have decreased compared to those in 2014 due to the increased volume of requests. The total amount of arrears increased by $43K from Q3, but the percentage of arrears managed in Q4 reached a historic high of 81% (against target of 80%). The 2015 Resident Survey showed resident satisfaction with our overall service delivery to be 64%, which fell short of our 75% target. Our response to the survey results included the creation of a “watch list” of vendors, the launch of the “Closing the Loop” pilot program to solicit resident feedback after repairs, and the re-instatement of a parking enforcement unit.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6

1 Generate Capital Stability

Sale of Houses

This quarterly YTD measure shows progress on our efforts to sell assets to raise the maximum funds possible to contribute toward capital repairs and to execute sales while minimizing impact on current tenants.

Overall, 2015 was a very successful year for the sale of standalone properties and the results achieved were in line with targets set in our 10-year capital plan. We met our target of raising $18M with the sale of 20 single-family homes for our State of Good Repair Fund. This includes $9M from nine properties sold in 2015 but closed in 2016. The targets were met despite various challenges and unanticipated delays in the relocation of some households. Due to the resilient housing market and diligent staff efforts, sales performance remained strong in 2015. 20 households were successfully relocated, reflecting effective engagement with affected households and the efforts made to support them throughout the process.

Mortgage Refinancing

This annual measure shows progress on growing the State of Good Repair fund by refinancing mortgages.

Sale of Houses 2015 Target 2015 Result 2014 Result

Stand-alone houses sold 20 20 57

Funds raised (projected) $18,000,000 $17,983,201 $32,707,171

Families relocated 18 20 5

Average relocation costs $25,000 $20,397 N/A

Average sale price N/A $899,160 $641,524

# sold above appraised value N/A 95% 100%

Average amount above listing value N/A $123,765 $92,579

% received multiple bids N/A 95% 96%

Strategic Plan Target: Grow the State of Good Repair Fund by at least $200 million through refinancing mortgages and approved sale of properties.

Results (2013-2015): Grew the SOGR fund by $447M via sale of houses, refinancing, recovery of development cost and property tax exemption.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7

In 2015, we finalized a mortgage transaction with Infrastructure Ontario for $232M, which, net of $32M mortgage renewals, will provide $200M new capital funding to our properties. Management expects to finalize another mortgage refinancing transaction with Infrastructure Ontario in 2016.

2 Deliver an Innovative Capital Improvement Program

Capital Program Homes

This quarterly measure shows the progress made on the delivery of both the planned and demand work of the capital repair program.

The 2015 Capital Repair Program was developed and delivered to complete a cumulative total of $175M by the end of year, including:

Mortgage Refinancing 2015 Target 2015 Result

Total proceeds - $232,000,000

Mortgage renewals - $31,918,746

New net equity raised $200,000,000 $200,081,254

Capital Program2015 Program

Target

2015 Program

Complete

2013/2014

Program

Carry

Forward

Complete

2015

Program

Budget*

Total

Completed in

2015

Planned capital repairs $77,851,700 $78,925,831 $16,965,826 $90,851,700 $95,891,657

Demand capital repairs $46,548,300 $44,512,097 N/A $46,548,300 $44,512,097

Building Condition

Assessments$1,000,000 $367,066 N/A $1,000,000 $367,066

Labour costs capitalized $11,600,000 $8,521,430 N/A $11,600,000 $8,521,430

State of Good Repair (In-

your-unit; common area,

exterior, grounds; MLS

Repairs)

$20,000,000 $23,382,940 N/A $25,000,000 $23,382,940

Totals $157,000,000 $155,709,364 $16,965,826 $175,000,000 $172,675,190

*Includes $157M of 2015 Program and $18M of carry forward from 2013 and 2014 Programs

Strategic Plan Target: Grow the State of Good Repair Fund by at least $200 million through refinancing mortgages and approved sale of properties.

Results (2013-2015): Grew the SOGR fund by $447M via sale of houses, refinancing, recovery of development cost and property tax exemption.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8

the delivery of $157M of the 2015 Program for planned and demand work including design, procurement, and construction; and

the delivery of $18M carry forward projects from the 2013 and 2014 Programs. By the end of 2015, $155.7M in capital repairs for the 2015 Program was completed, representing 99% of the $157M forecast target. This was accomplished despite staff vacancies that show capitalized labour costs under forecast by $3M. In addition to the 2015 Program repairs, another $17M in capital repairs were completed for projects that were initiated in 2013 and 2014 (carry forward). This brings the total capital repair work completed to $172.7M or to 98.7% of the 2015 Program budget of $175M. The remaining $2.3M will be re-allocated to ongoing capital repair projects. If the aforementioned staff vacancies had been filled and labour costs fully capitalized, we would have exceeded our $175M target.

State of Good Repair: In Your Unit and Common Areas

This quarterly measure shows progress made on the State of Good Repair (SOGR) In Your Unit and Common Area programs.

State of Good Repair In Your Unit and

Common Area Program

Q4 2015

YTD Target

Q4 2015 YTD

Results

2015

Program

Carry

Forward

2015

Program

Target*

2014 program developments with 2015

completion targets and budget allocations

underway or completed

11 11 0 11

New high-need communities underway for 2015 29 35 0 35

In-unit repairs underway or completed 3,600 3,845 200 4,500

Common areas, exterior and grounds repairs

underway or completed29 33 2 35

Budget spending estimates - interiors and

exterior$15,000,000 $18,096,603 $903,397 $19,000,000

*Includes 2015 results and carry forward

Strategic Plan Target: Invest $12.5M from the State of Good Repair Fund for necessary in-unit and common area repairs in up to 16,000 units in 80 high-need communities over 24 months.

Results (2013-2015): Extended program into 2015. Invested a total of $37.8M in 79 communities. 10,702 out of 21,000 units that were offered access to the program chose to participate.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 9

By the end of 2015, a total of $18.1M in 2014 and 2015 program in-unit, common area and exterior repairs have been completed. All 35 developments in the 2015 interior program are underway: 18 are fully completed, 5 are over 90% complete, and repairs have started in the remaining 12 developments. Improvements are completed or underway in 3,845 units. Exterior work is completed in 17 developments, underway in 16, and two will start in 2016. We expect another 200 households to participate as we complete work in developments already underway and start work in two communities. This would bring our total count to 4,045 household participants in the 2015 program. An interdivisional staff team, working with a Board member, conducted a customer satisfaction survey of residents who participated in the SOGR program in Q4. 57% of respondents said they were very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the program overall, and most residents would recommend it to other residents. Survey results can be found in the March 2016 report to the Resident Services Committee. Changes in reporting for 2016: The Board of Directors requested at their December 2015 meeting a review of the SOGR program as mandatory or optional with feedback from residents through consultation. While the review, which will be informed by the recent satisfaction survey results, is underway, this section of the performance report will be subsumed under the preceding Capital Program section.

Participatory Budgeting

This annual measure shows the funding of resident priorities through the Participatory Budgeting (PB) program.

The budget for the 2015 PB program was $8M. About 300 building meetings for project selection were held in July and August, after new tenant representatives were elected in the spring. 205 projects with a total value of $7.6M have been approved, over 60% of which have been priced or procured. The remaining $400K has been set aside as contingency funding. Examples of projects include walkway

Participatory Budgeting (PB) 2015 Target 2015 Result

$ allocated for resident-identified capital repair priorities $8,000,000 $7,621,000

Strategic Plan Target: Provide $5M per year for resident priorities.

Results (2013-2015): Provided $5M both in 2013 and 2014; $8M in 2015.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 10

repairs, landscaping, painting, installation of picnic tables, and recreation room upgrades. All projects are forecast to be completed by the end of Q2 2016. Changes in reporting for 2016: The Board of Directors requested a review of the PB program at their December 2015 meeting and changes to the PB program may be made pending the results of the review.

3 Grow the Revitalization Program

Revitalization Communities

This quarterly measure shows progress towards building and replacing housing units through revitalization, redevelopment and home ownership opportunities, working with partners to enhance the value of aging assets.

# UnitsValue

(in 000s)# Units

Value

(in 000s)# Units

Value

(in 000s)# Units

Value

(in 000s)

Planned 2,205 $774,489 328 $95,733 0 $0 2,533 $870,222

Design Development 2,923 $798,827 517 $154,700 449 $14,700 3,889 $968,227

Construction 643 $210,434 523 $152,952 139 $7,500 1,305 $370,886

Total Planned, Under Design

and In Construction (Q4)5,771 $1,783,750 1,368 $403,385 588 $22,200 7,727 $2,209,335

Sales (YTD) 1,019 $434,991 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1,019 $434,991

Occupied/Closed (YTD) 414 $103,406 118 $31,779 0 $0 532 $135,185

2015 Complete - Total Number of Units and Construction Value

Development Pipeline

Market Rental Refurbishment Total

Strategic Plan Target: Replace or refurbish over 2,200 units through revitalization and redevelopment activities. Assist up to 30 households to move to affordable home ownership

Results (2013-2015): Revised target to reflect that it will be achieved over four rather than three years i.e. by end of 2016. Delivered 951 replacement units and assisted 15 households to move to affordable home ownership at the end of 2015.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 11

We managed seven active revitalizations throughout 2015. Highlights of the year include breaking ground for Lawrence Heights, Phase 1 of Allenbury Gardens, and Phase 3 of Regent Park. At the close of 2015, our planning, design and construction pipeline was valued at $2.2B in development activity, representing over 7,700 units. 118 new replacement rent-geared-to-income and affordable rental (“rental”) units and 414 market condominium units were delivered in 2015, and sales of market units continued to grow on all marketing projects with total sales of 1,019 units. From 2013 to 2015, 951 families have moved into new replacement affordable rental units. With many more occupancies expected in 2016, we are narrowing the gap with our strategic plan target for completion of 2,200 new replacement or refurbished rental units by end of 2016. Q4 Highlights: A main highlight for Lawrence Heights in Q4 was the demolition of the first block of 22 townhouses in Phase 1. This marks the long-awaited start of revitalization for this community. Site servicing, which includes the construction of new roads and sewer and water systems, is expected to begin in Q1 2016. A revised submission for Leslie Nymark was sent to North York Planning Department in Q4. Staff is anticipating a final report to Council in Q2 2016. Sales launched for the market building at the beginning of Q4 2015 and has achieved 34% in sales for the quarter. The sale of eight market townhomes as part of Allenbury Gardens’ Phase 1 was launched in Q4. Five of the townhomes were sold and there has been a lot of interest for the product type. Sales remained steady for both market condominium


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 12

buildings, Soul and Connect, with 95% and 97% sales respectively. Excavation and shoring for the first new market and rental buildings are almost complete and pouring of the foundation has now begun. The Regent Park team has begun construction on two rental buildings: a Phase 3 rental building of 22 townhouses and a Phase 2 rental building of 155 apartment units and townhouses. Demolition of 150 units was initiated to continue the Phase 3 construction work. The majority of construction on the Regent Park Athletic Grounds was completed by the end of 2015, with the park opening anticipated in spring 2016. Townhouse construction is on schedule in Alexandra Park, with almost all exterior materials installed on the three townhouse blocks. Occupancy of the 40 units in the three blocks is expected to occur in April, June and July. Construction of the first condominium is also on schedule with the fourth storey now underway. Condo sales are progressing steadily, with over 90% of units sold in the first building and 53% of units sold in the second building in its second quarter of sales.

In 2015, Toronto Community Housing secured another $950K for affordable homeownership loans from the City of Toronto and Province of Ontario, building on the $1M secured from the City in 2014. Programs to assist Toronto Community Housing residents in purchasing a home are underway in Lawrence Heights, Regent Park, Allenbury Gardens, and Alexandra Park. In total, 10 families in our communities made their first home purchase in 2015.

Section 37 Funding

This quarterly measure refers to the part of the Planning Act that allows municipalities to obtain community benefits from developers in exchange for increased building height or density. Some ward councilors have obtained Section 37 benefits in the form of funding for capital investments in our communities. The funding is used for resident-identified priorities that benefit all residents of the building, such as improvements to common areas.

Affordable

Homeownership Program

2015

Complete

Units sold to residents 10

Units sold to non-residents 2

Value of sales $4,166,560

Available funding $1,321,920


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 13

In 2015, the Section 37 team made significant progress in managing projects through different stages, from engaging residents in the feedback and design process and tendering vendors, to construction and completion of projects. Through 2015, staff managed Section 37 capital improvement projects in 24 communities across four Wards (5, 20, 27, and 38). Select highlights for 2015:

Development Name

Section 37 Project

22 McCaul New entranceway that allows for greater accessibility, two new security cameras, a new bench, and new bike racks.

Jarvis Carlton Apartments

Newly renovated gym room and new five-piece equipment ensemble including a recumbent bike, a treadmill, a rowing machine, an upright lifecycle bike, and a set of new weights.

Beverley Manor

New recreation room and upgrades both to the terrace on the fourth floor and the courtyard on the ground floor. Construction is expected to begin in February and finish in May 2016.

Bishop Tutu Blvd.

Playground equipment and courtyard improvement project will be tendering for construction in 2016

Senator Croll Apartments

Additional security cameras, improving lighting, and replacing the lobby intercom. The project is tendering for construction in January 2016

Wood St. A set of four gates for the east and west entrances with fob access along with lighting improvements to the courtyard to improve security and safety. Construction is expected to begin in April 2016.

Collegeview Apartments

Upgrade of the community's 20th floor patio, which will include new garden beds, new patio furniture, and a stronger structure for their living wall. Construction will be tendered in early 2016.

Section 37 Funding 2015 Results

New funds received in 2015 $1,502,258

Total funds received since 2009* $4,813,093

Approximate full dollar value of projects that have begun** $3,910,875*Tracking for Section 37 funding began in 2009

**Includes new and existing funds, and refers to committed funds for projects w here resident engagement has begun


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 14

Changes in reporting for 2016: Since Section 37 funding is dependent on private sector development activity, we do not have control over funding availability and only communities in a few wards receive Section 37 funding each year. Moreover, quarterly progress on Section 37 projects tend to be incremental, so an annual progress report will be more informative. For these reasons in 2016 we will report progress on Section 37 projects in a separate annual report to the Board.

4 Focus on our Approach to Supporting Vulnerable Residents

Connecting Vulnerable Residents

These measures show progress against our goal of improving the organization’s internal capacity to identify residents who are at risk and co-ordinate third party supports.

Three new dedicated on-site partnerships were developed to support residents in maintaining successful tenancies in 2015. In Pelham Park Gardens, LOFT began providing supported housing for complex mental health users; and at 100 High Park, LOFT, in partnership with West Toronto Support Services, started to provide supporting housing services, including geriatric mental health supports and case management. At the Dan Harrison complex, Fred Victor, Margaret's Housing, and

Services for At-Risk Residents 2015 Target 2015 Results

New files from vulnerable residents addressed 1,150 1,836

At-risk residents connected to services 900 957

Partnerships for on-site supports in high-needs buildings 4 3

Strategic Plan Target: Connect 600 residents at-risk to services that support housing stability. Develop 10 partnerships in high-needs buildings to provide housing supports for residents.

Results (2013-2015): Connected or referred 2,859 residents to services. Developed 9 partnerships in high-needs buildings.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 15

other agencies began to deliver on-site health and psycho-social supports to residents. This year staff addressed over 1,800 files related to residents facing vulnerability. They also connected over 950 residents to health, social service and community supports through other organizations. These connections help residents keep their tenancies and remain stably housed. A new file management system, along with continued process improvements, were introduced in spring 2015 to better capture all of the connections made by staff.

5 Renew our Resident Engagement System

Engagement Opportunities for Residents

This annual measure is an aggregate measure of the broad range of opportunities in which we engage residents and shows progress on our work with the City of Toronto and community partners to renew and promote the use and development of community spaces and assets across the portfolio.

In March 2015, over 7,000 residents from across the city elected their nominated peers to represent their communities at local area councils. One of the first tasks for the newly elected Tenant Representatives was to elect two tenant members to sit on our Board of Directors. These elections were held in May and the new representatives’ terms started in July. As part of the Tenant Engagement Refresh, a tenant committee met to plan an engagement strategy to ensure that the maximum number of residents are able to participate in developing a refreshed system. In early 2016, the tenant committee will

Residents engaged in opportunities* 1,600 6,095

# new multi-use hubs under development 11 4

Resident Engagement Opportunities 2015 Result2015 Target

*Excludes the number of residents who participated in the tenant representative elections

Strategic Plan Target: Engage 5,000 residents in a broad range of opportunities. Develop or support 11 multi-use/shared facilities operating through strategic partnerships and resident led groups to broaden access across the community.

Results (2013-2015): Engaged 12,408 residents in opportunities. Identified 11 sites; currently developing 4 sites.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 16

host consultations across the portfolio to collectively explore options for a resident engagement system. In addition to resident engagement in the formal resident engagement system, we work with many residents through our many programs, including:

Leadership building programs for children and youth (e.g. Youth Action grants, Rookie League, If I Ruled T.O. conference, the Ontario Justice Education Network program);

Engagement programs for seniors (tenant councils, seniors financial forum);

Resident decision-making activities like Participatory Budgeting and tenant council activities; and

Community building activities and conferences like HERstory and HIStory. In addition to these programs facilitated by staff, there are many resident-led groups and initiatives not captured in our reporting that are integral to building vibrant communities. The number of residents engaged in opportunities over 2013-2015 far exceeded the original target of 5,000 because some programs have expanded due to increased funding not anticipated when developing the strategic plan. We have also developed a more robust tracking system of engagement opportunities since 2013. Targets will be updated to reflect the volume of our work more accurately in 2016. In 2015, we worked closely with the City of Toronto to identify four sites where capital dollars would be used to upgrade the spaces in neighbourhoods that have a dearth of community services. These four sites will be used as multi- purpose hubs that will enhance the social infrastructure of the neighbourhood. 11 sites were initially selected, on the assumption that we would be able to raise programming funds for these sites through the development of a foundation. This activity was shifted to take advantage of an emerging opportunity with the City of Toronto. We continue to work with the Social Development and Finance and Administration’s Partnership Opportunity Legacy fund to fund capital upgrades in four of the 11 sites.

Economic Opportunities for Residents

These annual measures reflect resident awareness and access to economic opportunities, including scholarships, entrepreneurship and mentorship programs, and education and access to the labour market.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 17

The community economic development and resident employment program promotes economic independence as a means of breaking the cycle of poverty by offering a range of entry points and programs to residents both locally and city-wide. Support for stay-in-school programs, initiatives that provide access to education, programs that support transition to employment, and access to self-employment all contribute to the creation of healthy and economically sustainable communities. In 2015, we offered financial literacy workshops where residents were provided with tools to improve their financial well-being such as debt prevention and self-care. We hosted Journeys to Success, an event where mentors were able to connect with female residents to provide them inspiration of what success can look like. We directly hire residents as well as connect them to employment services; YouthWorx is an example of where young people were hired for the summer to do various small scale light repair jobs. The Business in the Streets program supports residents to become financial sustainable by building their own businesses. It is an eight-week intensive program that helps entrepreneurs develop a business plan with support from industry professionals.

Economic opportunities for families and youth 8%* 7%*

Employment opportunities for residents 300 345

Scholarships granted 30 94

*Percent of residents age 16-70. A total of 4,848 residents were provided with access.

Economic Opportunities 2015 Targets 2015 Results

Strategic Plan Target: Create 15 full-time job opportunities for youth by the end of 2013. Support the creation or expansion of 12 resident-led businesses. Provide access to employment and financial literacy opportunities to 25% of the youth and family residents in our communities by the end of 2015. Award 30 scholarships to residents annually.

Results (2013-2015): Created 15 permanent full-time job opportunities by 2015. Supported the creation of 3 resident-led businesses and trained 99 residents in entrepreneurship. Provided access to employment and financial literacy opportunities to 18% of the youth and family residents in our communities by the end of 2015. Awarded 157 scholarships.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 18

Divisional Objective: Neighbourhood Building and Improved Community Safety

This measure demonstrates the volume of various crimes and incidents Community Safety Unit (CSU) attended to that occurred on Toronto Community Housing property.

In Q4 2015 the Community Safety Unit (CSU) implemented a new deployment model. The geographically-based patrol zones allows officers to have a more consistent presence in each community, helping to build trust with our residents and work together to tackle issues of concern. Throughout 2015 CSU conducted 917 joint patrols with Toronto Police Service compared to the 739 conducted in 2014, an increase of 24%. CSU also held 126 community safety council meetings along with staff from different divisions, and organized 380 community engagement events. Toronto Community Housing and Crime Stoppers kicked off a new partnership in August to increase safety in our communities. CSU is working with Crime Stoppers to install signage and distribute public awareness materials in our communities. In 2016 CSU will be holding sessions to educate residents, staff and partners on CSU's role and responsibilities and build capacity for residents to increase their own safety through information sessions on topics such as fire prevention and personal emergency awareness. Progress on these education sessions will be reported on starting in Q1 2016.

Reported Crime and Incidents 2014 2015 Variance

Crime Against Persons 696 768 10%

Crime Against Property 1,710 2,406 40%

Incidents Affecting Quality of Life 2,299 2,626 14%

Other Incidents* 33,039 33,184 0%

Total Crime and Incidents Reported 37,744 38,984 3%

*Other Incidents include: information, unfounded incidents, assisting residents, parking, law

enforcement, disputes, disturbances, etc.

For descriptions of all other categories, please see the Appendix.

NOTE: Data from third party security companies are not included as there is a discrepency in

the statistical headings.

Reported Crime and Incidents


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 19

Evictions for Cause

This measure shows how many residents were evicted for “cause” in the reporting period, which is defined as evictions for reasons other than arrears.

The number of notices filed was up in Q4. The updated Evictions for Cause procedures were completed, and a comprehensive training plan to support implementation will occur early 2016. There will be new performance measures for this section starting in Q3 2016 to demonstrate staff effort to resolve tenancy issues through alternative methods of resolution prior and in addition to an application for eviction at the Landlord and Tenant Board, such as tenancy management meetings and mediated agreements.

6 Develop our People to be Engaged and Capable

Toronto Community Housing is committed to ensuring that our employees are engaged and have the training and resources they need to complete their work. We successfully supported and implemented several key training and development initiatives across the organization in 2015. We delivered nonviolent crisis intervention training to staff to support identification of risk behaviours and appropriate responses


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 20

for de-escalation and prevention. We provided building sciences training and cleaner standard operating procedure training to enhance staff skill, knowledge and standardize service delivery. We updated our General Orientation materials for new staff, including an added focus on customer service. Procedures relating to workplace violence risk assessment, traumatic incident response, handling suspicious packages, and heat stress were also developed and approved. We further developed training for the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act in 2015 to ensure that we are in compliance and continue to make Ontario and our organization more accessible. In 2015, 100% of our management/exempt staff completed their Performance Management Plans (PMPs) and a new pay-for-performance model was developed and finalized. Our recruitment unit was staffed to full complement and prepared the January 2016 launch of the Applicant Tracking System (ATS), which automates and streamlines the recruiting process and renders it more efficient and transparent. Changes in reporting for 2016: New related performance measures aligned with industry standards will be introduced later in 2016 as reporting from the ATS becomes available.

7 Be a Landlord of Excellence

Service Requests Response

This quarterly measure is separated into Administrative and Maintenance requests and shows the volume and percentage of service requests received that are "resolved" within the committed turnaround time (two days for Administrative and five days for Maintenance) for the reporting period.

Q4 ResultsRequests

Opened

Service Level

Targets

% Closed

Within Target

Administrative requests 33,342 80% 69%

Maintenance requests 120,164 80% 65%


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 21

The service level for administrative requests fell to 69% in Q4 from 77% in Q3. Although there was a nominal increase in the volume of requests, service levels declined primarily due to a surge in administrative follow-ups (arriving specifically in December) stemming from the annual unit inspection. Staff shrinkage in November (related to training) and December (related to vacation/absence) was also a contributing factor.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 22

The volume of maintenance requests increased by 2% (2,700 work orders) as compared to Q3 and was in line with the seasonal trend for Q4. Lower service levels during the quarter were related to staff shrinkage (related to vacation/absence), the annual unit inspections that were concurrently in progress, and the higher number of priority maintenance requests (primarily heating/plumbing). Given the recent trend of service levels, Q4 is considered somewhat anomalous. The centralized maintenance dispatch was “soft-launched” in November. Dispatch staff were recruited from the superintendent base, with funding from a previously centralized maintenance program. The Maintenance Dispatch team will assume responsibility to dispatch and track vendor work so that site staff can focus on delivering repairs in their buildings instead of managing vendors.

Client Care Centre

This quarterly measure shows performance in customer service as provided by the Client Care Centre.

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Tenant Calls

Totals / Averages

90% Within 90

Seconds33% 57% 49% 39% 90 212

Elevator90% Within 30

Seconds62% 70% 67% 83% 30 24

Emergency90% Within 30

Seconds54% 54% 56% 75% 30 50

Alarm90% Within 30

Seconds53% 48% 57% 76% 30 52

Other Service Calls

Totals / Averages*

90% Within 30

Seconds59% 58% 63% 61% 30 44

Tenant Calls

Other Service Calls

*Includes data from other sources, i.e. vendor calls, market rent inquiries, and after hours containment work orders.

Q4 Client Care Centre

Measures

Average Speed

of Answer -

Service Level

Target

Actual Service LevelAverage

Speed of

Answer -

Target

Q4 Average

Speed of

Answer -

Actual


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 23

Average speed of answer and abandonment rates for tenant calls rose to 212 seconds and 22% respectively from 154 seconds and 18% in Q3. Service level performance within the 90-second target declined to 39% from 49% in Q3. The decline in Q4 performance can be attributed to the 5% increase in calls offered

Tenant Calls

Tenant Calls

Totals / Averages81,941 22% 56,596

Other Service Calls

Elevator 7,949 14% 6,820

Emergency 689 10% 619

Alarm 14,723 6% 13,892

Other Service Calls

Totals / Averages*23,361 9% 21,331


**Calculations for abandoment rate exclude calls disconnected within 10 seconds.

Q4 Client Care Centre

Measures

Q4 Total Calls

Offered

Q4 Abandonment Rate

(Target 10%)

Q4 Total Calls

Answered


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 24

(received) over what was forecasted for the heating season, as well as staff attrition during the quarter. Major improvements were achieved in Q4 in service level response to other service calls: 83% of elevator calls, 75% of emergency calls, and 76% of alarm calls were answered within 30 seconds. For comparison, the service levels for these categories were 67%, 56%, and 57% respectively in Q3.

The overall average speed of answer and abandonment rate for tenant calls in 2015 were 197 seconds and 20% respectively, both of which improved over the 2014 performance of 216 seconds and 23%. Continuous improvements in the aforementioned key performance indicators are expected through 2016 as staff adjust to more structured issue resolution process and training. The Client Care Center coaching and performance management program will be fully implemented by Q2 2016 with toolkits that enable managers to measure the quality of interactions between residents and Client Care Center representatives. Profile: Elevator Performance In the Getting it Done report, we committed to improving elevator reliability and performance. We also committed to reporting on elevator performance quarterly, and to pilot elevator monitoring software that will provide more detailed and useful data on elevator functionality.

2015 Client Care

Centre Measures

Average Speed

of Answer -

Service Level

Target

Actual

Service

Level

Average

Speed of

Answer -

Target

Average

Speed of

Answer -

Actual

Total

Calls

Offered

Abandonment

Rate**

(Target 10%)

Total Calls

Answered

Tenant Calls

Totals / Averages*

90% Within 90

Seconds44% 90 197 321,152 20% 226,113

Elevator90% Within 30

Seconds61% 30 24 34,756 11% 30,036

Emergency90% Within 30

Seconds51% 30 55 3,532 8% 3,161

Alarm90% Within 30

Seconds51% 30 57 57,361 5% 53,987

Other Service Calls

Totals / Averages*

90% Within 30

Seconds60% 30 46 95,649 7% 87,184

Tenant Calls

Other Service Calls


**Calculations for abandoment rate exclude calls disconnected within 10 seconds.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 25

Due to system limitations, we cannot currently report on the up-time availability of our elevators. We can, however, report on the number of service calls received from elevators, and the number of work orders resulting from these calls. A total of 34,756 calls were made from the 591 elevators across our portfolio in 2015—an average of 4.9 calls per elevator per month (against an industry benchmark of one call per elevator per month). Since the majority of elevator calls were made by accident or in error, only 28.6% or 8,583 of the 30,036 calls answered by Client Care agents resulted in a work order. Information about elevator service is currently collected manually through the Client Care Centre, which is responsible for responding to elevator service calls and dispatching the appropriate vendors in response to a downage. Reporting on elevator performance will be improved in 2016 as we pilot an elevator monitoring software that will log issues immediately, as well as detect mechanical failures before they result in a downage.

CSU Dispatch Centre – Calls for Service

This quarterly measure shows performance in customer service as provided by the Community Safety Unit (CSU)’s Dispatch Centre to residents, staff and other external customers.

In 2015, the average service level remained steady at 80%, which is consistent with that achieved in 2014, as well as the industry standard service level. The average abandonment rate in 2015 was 8.1%, an improvement compared to 9.1% in 2014. In 2016 CSU is looking at hiring an additional full time and one part-time dispatcher. CSU is also providing specialized customer service training to all dispatchers. Both initiatives will further improve service performance and the customer experience.

CSU

Dispatch

Service

Total

Received

Calls *

Total

Dispatched

Calls **

% of Calls

that are

Dispatched

Total

Abandoned

Calls*

Abandonment

Rate

(8% Target)

Average

Speed

Answered*

Average

Talk Time*

Service

Level

2015 107,628 33,696 31.3% 8,745 8.1% 0:10 1:05 80%

* Data Source - Avaya Phone System

** Data Source - Cora Reporting System


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 26

Arrears Management and Eviction Prevention

This quarterly measure shows the outcome of our commitment to resolving arrears as early as possible by connecting with residents in order to prevent evictions whenever possible.

Detailed definitions of the sources can be found in the Appendix on page 49.

Rent and parking arrears have been specifically profiled as they are the biggest driver of overall arrears (68%). Rent and parking arrears amount to $5.6M when residents who only owe last month’s rent are removed (87% of which are at a managed stage of the collections process). 81% of rent and parking arrears are at a managed (legal) stage of the collection process, and 34% are within repayment agreements. 93% of arrears with “no action taken yet” are in arrears for the present and/or last month’s rent.

Arrears Value % of Total Arrears % Managed

Rent and Parking Only 7,126,972$ 68% 81%

Retroactive Charges 2,743,377$ 26% 84%

Legal, Maintenance and Other 648,133$ 6% 66%

Total Arrears 10,518,482$ 100% 81%

Arrears Value by SourceQ4 2015

Profile: Rent and Parking Only

Age of ArrearsArrears Value % of Arrears # of Units % of Units

Owing present month 1,946,058$ 27% 5,390 73%

Owing 2 months 819,363$ 11% 688 9%

Owing 3 months 658,021$ 9% 371 5%

Owing more than 3 months 3,703,529$ 52% 948 13%

Total 7,126,972$ 7,397

Profile: Rent and Parking Only

Stage of ProcessArrears Value % of Arrears # of Units % of Units

No Action Taken Yet 1,359,576$ 19% 3,275 44%

N4 Notice to End Tenancy Served 2,305,414$ 32% 2,321 31%

Repayment Agreements Arranged 2,447,573$ 34% 1,542 21%

Filed at the LTB / Order Granted by LTB 1,014,409$ 14% 259 4%

Total 7,126,972$ 7,397

Strategic Plan Target: Maintain eviction rate below 1%.

Results (2013-2015): Eviction rate maintained below 1% every year.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 27

Since the implementation of the revised arrears collection process in August 2014, total arrears have increased by 19% ($1.67M) and the number of files by 26% (1,950 files). However:

Arrears within repayment agreements have increased by 175% and the number of files within repayment agreements has grown by 102% (1,097 files).

Arrears taken to Landlord and Tenant Board have increased by 127% (+780K) and the number of cases is up by 31% (73 files).

Tenant Services Co-ordinators (TSCs) continue to face significant workload challenges, primarily driven by the increase of files and the additional time spent on each file due to increased efforts to monitor repayment agreements. This has resulted in a declining number of files being moved through the process within the prescribed 60 days (from N4 Notice to L1 Application at the LTB). Aside from the workload challenges, the primary key performance indicators are trending in a positive direction and are at historic highs since the implementation of the new process, with 81% of all files at a managed stage and 39% of all files within repayment agreements. In Q4, 38 senior households and 5 non-senior vulnerable households were referred to the Office of Commissioner of Housing Equity (OCHE). Revised Arrears Collection Process Pilot A pilot was implemented in two Operating Units (OUs) in Q3 2015 to evaluate opportunities to improve the arrears collection process. The focus of the pilot was to address workload management challenges including:

Growing number of residents in arrears;

Direct Contract Direct Contract

Arrears - Total Balance 2,011,776$ 441,076$ 2,632,347$ 553,890$

Arrears - # Households 1,672 472 2,032 492

Average Arrears Value $1,203 $934 $1,295 $1,126

In Arrears Due to Loss of Subsidy 78 N/A 74 N/A

Profile: Seniors HouseholdsQ4 2014 Results Q4 2015 Results

Eviction Rate Target2013

Results

2014

Results

2015

Results

Eviction Rate < 1% 0.67% 0.25% 0.37%

Number of Households Evicted - 375 138 204


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 28

Growing number of repayment agreements to track (in absence of an automated ability to monitor);

Duplicative documentation requirements (entry within two systems); and

Competing workload (rent calculation, customer service, evictions for cause, etc).

The pilot shifted certain process responsibilities to clerks, superintendents and other management to alleviate the workload of Tenant Service Co-ordinators. The project included staff training and further development of the business tools for reporting. The results of the pilot were positive:

The total number of accounts in arrears and their related value of arrears has

been decreasing marginally.

The number of files being negotiated into repayment agreements has

increased significantly.

The percentage of files being managed (N4 stage or later) has been

increasing.

Files are being forwarded to the LTB in closer proximity to the timelines set out

in the arrears collection process and in greater quantity.

Following a review of the pilot’s outcomes with the Commissioner of Housing Equity,

the implementation of the revised process management will be rolled out to the

broader portfolio. Management anticipates the implementation to occur in phases

that correspond with the training deliverables to staff.

Accessibility Improvements

This annual measure shows progress made on meeting the capital accessibility needs of residents.

Planned common area accessibility upgrades $3,500,000 21 $2,398,944 $1,582,098

In-unit accessibility improvements* $2,500,000 81 $2,685,398 $2,099,580

Common area accessibility improvements* $500,000 4 $379,825 $367,003

Totals $6,500,000 106 $5,464,168 $4,048,681

*In response to tenant and staff requests

2015 Accessibility Improvement

Components

Total

Budget

Total POs

Issued

Total

Completed

Total # of

Projects


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 29

By the end of 2015, a total of $5.5M in purchase orders for accessibility improvement work were issued, of which $4M was completed. Of the 106 accessibility upgrade projects, 62 (58%) have been completed and the remaining 44 are in various stages of completion (e.g. funding approved, procurement completed, under construction). Delays in upgrades are largely due to design revisions resulting in enlarged scopes of work, funding adjustments, re-tendering where bids exceeded project budgets, and changes in accommodation requirements.

8 Improve Resident Satisfaction

Closing the Loop Pilot Program

The Closing the Loop pilot program, in which staff contact residents following repairs to solicit feedback on the quality of repairs and of the service they received, was conducted from June to August 2015. The results of the pilot program were reported in the Q3 Performance Report. We have been granted additional funding from the City of Toronto to expand the program to the whole portfolio in 2016. Results from the expanded program will be available in Q2.

Resident Satisfaction with Services

This section presents the results of the 2015 Resident Survey, which measured overall satisfaction as well as satisfaction with specific services such as repairs and maintenance, community safety, customer service and resident engagement.

Strategic Plan Target:

Achieve a 75% overall resident satisfaction rating by 2015.

Increase resident satisfaction with the quality and conditions of their homes and buildings from 67% to 75%.

Have 75% of residents rate their community as safe or safer.

Achieve a 15% increase in resident satisfaction with the quality and timeliness of services.

Results (2013-2015): The 2015 Resident Survey showed that:

64% of residents were satisfied with overall service delivery (68% in 2012).

63% of residents were satisfied with the overall condition of their units (67% in 2012).

58% say they are satisfied with the job we are doing keeping their community safe and secure (65% in 2012).

81% of respondents said maintenance staff were respectful and 66% said the repairs were done when they were told they would be done (compared to 80% and 62% respectively in 2012).


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 30

The 2015 Resident Survey was conducted in the spring of 2015. A total of 16,900 packages were mailed to random samples of residents in the 13 Operating Units. In total, 3,383 residents completed the survey, primarily by mail, but also online and by telephone. The response rate of 20% is a decrease from previous paper format surveys, which had response rates of 40%; however, it is still high for industry standards. The survey found 27% of residents are very satisfied and 38% are somewhat satisfied overall with Toronto Community Housing, a decline of 4% compared with the 2012 Resident Survey. This is a result of more residents saying they are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied in 2015; the proportion of residents who are dissatisfied (25%) remained unchanged. The survey found that overall condition of buildings is the key driver of satisfaction. This is related to significant capital investment, rather than specific service initiatives that can be implemented with the resources we currently have. With the funding secured from the City of Toronto and the growth of our State of Good Repair fund, we delivered record levels of repairs through a $175M capital program in 2015 and will continue with a $250M program in 2016. Some of the steps we took to respond to the survey results include:

Created a “watch list” of vendors to make sure they meet our service standards;

Launched the “Closing the Loop” pilot program to empower residents by giving them a way to report on their satisfaction with repairs done in their homes;

Introduced additional training in carpentry, plumbing, and electrical for superintendents;

Re-instated a parking enforcement unit in response to “illegally parked vehicles” being the security issue with the largest increase from 2012;

Began to explore moving toward a smoke-free Toronto Community Housing (76% of respondents expressed support); and

Used the results to inform our 2016 divisional planning process.

Overall conditions of their units 67% 63% 75%

Keeping their community safe and secure 65% 58% 75%

Repair was done when they were told it would be done 62% 66% 77%

Overall condition with their buildings 68% 58% 75%

Overall satisfaction 68% 64% 75%

Resident Survey: Satisfaction Measures2012

Results

2015

Results

2015

Targets


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 31

The results from the 2015 Resident Survey will serve as benchmarks for the upcoming Resident Survey, to be conducted in 2017. More information about the 2015 Resident Survey can be found in the report presented at the June 8th Board meeting and at http://www.torontohousing.ca/residentsurvey.

9 Ensure Long-Term Financial Sustainability

Vacancy

This quarterly measure shows vacancy rates and vacancy loss by Rent-Geared-to-Income and Market units as well as by direct and contract managed portfolios.

The vacancy rate for RGI units decreased slightly in Q4 in the direct managed portfolio while remaining steady within the contract management portfolio. The improvement can be attributed to more staff resources on the rental task force, a centralized staff team responsible for vacancy management.

Direct Contract Direct Contract Direct Contract

Vacancy Rate - RGI 2.0% 2.0% 2.6% 2.3% 2.1% 1.9%

Vacancy Loss - RGI $3,558,104 $902,096 $4,647,002 $1,143,859 $3,825,026 $961,756

Vacancy Rate - Market 2.0% 2.0% 2.4% 1.9% 2.5% 1.5%

Vacancy Loss - Market $1,179,052 $269,928 $1,480,441 $239,025 $1,485,694 $184,240

Vacancy Rate - Overall 2.0% 2.0% 2.5% 2.2% 2.1% 1.9%

Vacancy Loss - Overall $4,737,156 $1,172,024 $6,127,444 $1,382,884 $5,310,720 $1,145,995

Vacancy Rate & Loss2015 Target 2015 Results 2014 Results

Strategic Plan Target: Increase occupancy rate to 98%.

Results (2013-2015): Maintained occupancy rate at 98%.

http://www.torontohousing.ca/residentsurvey


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 32

Vacancy rates increased from 2014 as the vacancy management function transitioned from individual Operating Units to the centralized team. In addition to managing vacancies that started in 2015, staff worked to eliminate the backlog of vacant units and identify units that should have been taken out of the vacancy pool and placed on hold for capital repairs, emergency transfers, and other reasons. Vacancy Aging This annual measures shows the percentage of rentable units that remain vacant at the defined age categories.

Results for vacancy aging fell well under target due to the lengthy turnaround process to prepare a unit for a showing, make offers for the unit, and allow the tenant time to move in after accepting the unit. An average of nine offers were made before a unit was accepted. The highest number of offers made by staff for a single unit in Q4 was 97. Over 450 units were returned to the vacancy pool from the relocation team after having been on hold for months, thus affecting the overall aging numbers. The centralized team will be at full staff complement and will manage the vacancies for all Operating Units by Q1 2016, which is expected to increase offer rates and accelerate turnaround time.

Turnover and Turnaround

This quarterly measure shows the time it takes to “turn” a unit from the point it is vacated by one resident to the point it is available for leasing to another.

Vacancy Aging

(rentable units only)2015 Target 2015 Results 2014 Results

< 31 days 70% 13% 16%

31-60 days 20% 16% 20%

61+ days 10% 71% 64%

Routine "turns" completed within 10 days 90% 598 54%

Kitchen/bathroom "turns" completed within 30 days 90% 213 84%

Budget spent to date 100% $9,672,246 97%

Q4 Results

(Units / Budget)

Q4 Results

(against Target)Turnover Target


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 33

The average turnaround time was 13 days for routine “turns” (against a target of 10 days) and 21 days for kitchen/bathroom “turns” (against a target of 30 days). Most of the “turns” that exceeded the tunaround time had change orders added at various stages of the turnaround process. While service levels for both the routine “turns” and kitchen/bathroom “turns” were well under the 90% target, both have improved steadily throughout 2015. The improvement can be attributed to efficiencies from a new work management system, as well as ongoing efforts to provide staff with additional training. We anticipate continued improvement in the turnaround time in Q1 2016.

Savings Through Procurement

This quarterly measure monitors the efforts, impact, and value generated as a result of our competitive public procurement processes.

Procurement 2015 Target 2015 Results 2014 ResultsYear over Year

Trending

Number of RFx Issued* 200 395 177 123%

Average Value per Project $0 $515,635 601,845$ -14%

Total Average Value of Vendor Bids** $100,000,000 $198,519,358 106,526,619$ 86%

Procurement Cost Avoidance $ $18,000,000 $41,373,003 22,386,217$ 85%

Procurement Cost Avoidance % 20% 21% 21% 0%

*RFx's include Requests for Information, Quotes, Proposals, etc.

**Sum of the average value of vendor bids per project for the 395 projects


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 34

Third party spend This annual measure shows the percentage of purchases made in the Greater Toronto Area that support the local economy.

The number of RFx's (e.g. Request for Information, Quotes, or Proposals) issued in 2015 increased by 93% over that in 2014 largely due to a change in methodology of receiving Design and Engineering quotes. In addition, the procurement threshold for utilizing existing rosters increased to $750K, which meant vendors on these rosters who are unsuccessful in bidding for contracts are incentivized to lower their bids in subsequent competitions. This has resulted in a more competitive bidding process and has in turn increased our total cost avoidance figure by 85% over that in 2014. The average value per project decreased by 14% in 2015 due to the smaller dollar values associated with this year’s RFx's. Changes in reporting for 2016: New measures for procurement are under development for 2016. The new measures will focus less on cost avoidance and more on our compliance to and the effectiveness of the public procurement process.

Commercial Revenue

This annual measure shows the revenue generated from our commercial opportunities outside of residential leases.

In 2015, commercial revenues were about $729K or 3% higher than 2014 actuals. This positive variance is mainly due to increases in retail rents, low vacancy rates, and new initiatives to increase commercial parking and film revenues. In 2016, staff will focus on finding new business opportunities to further increase revenues and in an effort to mitigate the substantial losses in revenue as a result of the reduction of rooftop antenna sites rentals across the portfolio, reflecting changes in mobile network technology.

2014 Actual 2015 Target 2015 Actual

Third party spend within the GTA 79% 80% 72%

2014 Actuals Target Annual Increase 2015 Results

$23,597,750 3% $24,327,323

Strategic Plan Target: Increase commercial revenue by 3% per year.

Results (2013-2015): Increased commercial revenue by 3% per year.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 35

Divisional Objective: Communications Scorecard

News Media Impact Score

This quarterly measure tracks the public impact of media coverage of Toronto Community Housing. The score ranges from -10 to +10, with low scores signifying negative coverage and high scores positive coverage, while scores near the centre of the range represent balanced/neutral coverage. It is calculated through an industry-standard method involving weighting the tone score according to the influence of the publication.

Toronto Community Housing's media impact score continues to improve for the third consecutive quarter, ending the year in positive territory, suggesting that media coverage this quarter had a small net positive impact on our public perception. Periods of significant positive coverage were the result of the Lawrence Heights revitalization launch in October and the If I Ruled T.O. conference in November. Dips in early November and December corresponded to negative coverage on delayed repairs and a tenant’s concern over damaged belongings following relocation. Tracking for the last three quarters of 2015 showed a significant improvement in the impact of media coverage on public perceptions of Toronto Community Housing. While the first half of the year was marked by periods of sustained negative media coverage, the second half of the year yielded overall neutral coverage with significant periods of positive results, in particular from proactive efforts during the federal election around the pressing need for investment by the other two orders of government in the capital repair program, promotion of our revitalization and ReSet work, and improvements to services for residents resulting from commitments made in the Getting It Done report in response to the Mayor’s Task Force interim report.

Q1 Result Q2 Result Q3 Result Q4 Result

News Media Impact Score N/A -0.62 0.00 0.53


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 36

Summary: 2013-2015 Performance

2015 was the last year of our 2013-2015 Strategic Plan, Homeward 2016. While the Board of Directors has approved the extension of the strategic plan through the 2016 Corporate Goals, we have met some of the targets for the strategic plan at the end of 2015. Our performance against all the targets set out in Homeward 2016 is briefly summarized below, and presented in the scorecard starting on page 28. We met 13 out of 27 (48%) targets set out in our Strategic Plan at the end of 2015. Two of the targets (8%) were met substantially but not in full; six were not met but progress have been made against them (22%). The remaining six targets (22%) have been changed or were no longer applicable because they did not fully reflect our work as it shifted to respond to emerging priorities. Quality Homes We met three of the seven targets under the Quality Homes strategic priority:

We exceeded our target of growing the State of Good Repair Fund by $200M, raising a total of $447M over three years.

We offered access to the State of Good Repair program to over 21,000 households and have invested over $35M in 79 communities against the target of $12.5M in 80 communities.

We allocated $5M in both 2013 and again in 2014 for the Participatory Budgeting program, increasing the budget to $8M in 2015.

We made solid progress in our revitalization initiatives and are on our way to achieving the target of replacing or refurbishing 2,200 rent-geared-to-income (RGI) units through redevelopment. By the end of 2015, we delivered 951 replacement RGI units and over 1,400 market condominium units. The slower than expected progress can be attributed to delays in construction and city planning approval processes. Over the past three years, we assisted 15 households in moving to affordable homeownership. While we did not meet our target of 30 households, we will continue to work with partners to secure external sources of financial assistance and to encourage residents to participate.

48%

8%

22%

22%

Performance Report Measures

Exceed or within 5%of target

5-10% variancefrom target

10%+ variance fromtarget

Target notapplicable / changed


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 37

Vibrant Communities We met or exceeded five of the 11 targets under the Vibrant Communities strategic priority:

We provided over 12,000 residents with engagement opportunities (target: 5,000).

We connected over 2,600 residents to support services to help maintain successful tenancies (target: 600).

With the support of partners, we awarded 157 scholarships over three years to young leaders (target: 90).

We created 15 permanent full-time jobs for youth (target: 15).

We upgraded over 800 security cameras in a continual effort to bring our CCTV system in line with industry standards.

Because the nature of our work under this strategic priority is highly dependent on the involvement of partner organizations and residents’ interest to participate, we have seen a varying degree of success in other related projects:

We developed nine on-site partnerships with support services with the help of Local Health Integration Networks (target: 10). A tenth partnership was announced in early 2016.

We shifted our focus from supporting the creation of resident-led businesses to providing entrepreneurship training to interested residents. 99 residents have completed this training since 2013, and three have started their own businesses.

We have not developed a $2.5M fund to increase access in neighbourhood opportunities, but have submitted an application to Canada Revenue Agency to grant us status to issue charitable tax receipts.

We have identified the targeted 11 potential sites for multi-use community spaces, and are working with the City of Toronto to develop four of them.

Service Excellence We met five of the nine targets under the Service Excellence strategic priority:

We maintained occupancy rates at 98% and eviction rate below 1%.

We increased commercial revenue by 3% per year.

We completed building level budgets and provided regular financial reporting to the Board.

We continue to work on reviewing our complaints management process and improving rent calculation accuracy. Results for both updated processes will be available in 2016.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 38

We did not meet our target of increasing the excess of revenue over expenses by 5% by 2015 as revenues have been flat and our expenses are consistenly increasing. However, we balanced our budget every year and in fact exceeded our projected excess of revenue over expenses by $5.5M in 2015. Resident satisfaction: There were four targets related to resident satisfaction that were measured using the bi-ennial 2015 Resident Survey. While almost two-thirds of residents expressed overall satisfaction with the services we provide, results from the survey showed that we did not meet any of the targets set out in the strategic plan. The survey pointed to several areas where we need to do better, and we took concrete steps to respond to resident concerns. More information may be found on page 24 of this report and at http://www.torontohousing.ca/residentsurvey. The 2013-2015 strategic plan has been extended by the Board with the approval of the 2016 Corporate Goals. The Corporate Workplan, developed with all divisions at the end of 2015, presents a set of 94 tactics with clear performance metrics and will guide our work in 2016. Toronto Community Housing is committed to accountability and transparency, and we will continue to work with the Board to improve our strategic performance.


Strategic Plan Scorecard

...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 39

Strategy Target 2013 Progress 2014 Progress 2015 Progress 2013-2015 Status

Quality Homes

1.1 Improve Building Conditions

State of Good Repair: In Your Unit and Common Area Note: Program has been extended into 2015.

Invest $12.5M from the State of Good Repair (SOGR) fund for necessary in-unit and common area repairs in up to 16,000 units in 80 high need communities over 24 months.

Invested $9.5M on interior and exterior repairs in 2,826 units in 17 communities.

Invested $10.3M on interior and exterior repairs in 4,031 units in 27 communities.

Invested $18M on repairs in 3,845 units in 35 communities.

Invested $37.8M in 79 communities

Offered access to the voluntary program to over 21,000 units with repairs underway; total uptake in 10,702 units

Grow the State of Good Repair Fund

Grow the SOGR fund by at least $200M through refinancing mortgages and the approved sale of properties.

Sold 26 houses and generated $12.3M for capital repairs.

Raised $106M in mortgage refinancing.

Sold 57 houses and generated $34M for capital repairs.

Raised $63.3M in mortgage refinancing.

Sold 20 houses and generated $18M.

Raised $200M in mortgage refinancing.

Grew the SOGR fund by $447M via sale of houses, refinancing, recovery of development cost and property tax exemption.

Participatory Budgeting (PB)

Provide $5M per year for resident priorities.

Allocated $5M for 2013 PB Budget

Allocated $5M for 2014 PB budget

Allocated $8M for 2015 PB budget

Allocated at least $5M annually

1.2 Maximize Land Value and Expand Housing Options for Current and Future Residents

...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 40


Revitalization Communities Note: Target revised to reflect that it will be achieved by end of 2016.

Replace or refurbish over 2,200 units through revitalization and redevelopment activities.

Replaced or refurbished 582 rental units

Delivered 292 market condo units






Delivered 1,439 market condo units

We will continue to work toward the target in 2016.

Affordable Home-ownership

Assist up to 30 households to move to affordable home ownership.

No affordable market home purchases.

3 affordable home purchases.

Secured $1M for affordable homeownership loans from the City

Programs underway in Lawrence Heights, Regent Park and Allenbury Gardens.

10 home ownership purchases by residents.

2 home ownership purchases by non-residents.

Assisted 15 households move to affordable home ownership.

1.3 Maintain the Condition and Quality of New and Repaired Buildings

Preparing Vacant Units

Reduce the cost to prepare vacant units that have been built or refurbished since 2012.

Activity was shifted to reflect emerging priorities.


Activity was shifted to focus on 2015 Corporate Goals.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 41


Resident Satisfaction

Increase resident satisfaction with the quality and conditions of their homes and buildings from 67% to 75%.

No tool to measure progress.


Results from 2015 Resident Survey showed 63% of respondents were satisfied with the overall condition of their units (67% in 2012).

We continue to make record levels of capital investments into our buildings in 2016.

Vibrant Communities

2.1 Neighbourhood Building and Improved Community Safety

CCTV systems Ensure CCTV systems are operating at industry standards



Upgraded 843 security cameras in 21 communities.

843 security cameras upgraded in 2015. An additional 1,500 will be upgraded in 2016.

Community Safety

Have 75% of residents rate their community as safe or safer.



Results from 2015 Resident Survey showed 58% of respondents were satisfied with the job Toronto Community Housing is doing keeping their community safe and secure (65% in 2012).

Did not achieve target of 75% residents rate their community as safe or safer but we used the results to inform changes to our Community Safety Unit, including the reinstatement of a parking enforcement unit.

2.2 Economic Opportunities

Residents Connected to Economic Opportunities

Create 15 full-time job opportunities for youth by the end of 2013.


Employed 10 residents in full-time intern positions; five received extensions.

Created 15 permanent full-time Building and Community Facilitator positions.

Created 15 full-time job opportunities for youth by 2015.

...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 42



Support the creation or expansion of 12 resident led businesses.

2 resident led companies received landscaping contracts worth a total of $56K.

Trained 60 residents in entrepreneurship program.

Activity was shifted to focus on other emerging priorities.

Created 1 resident-led business.

Trained 39 residents in entrepreneurship program.

Resources were shifted to provide training for resident entrepreneurs instead of creating resident-led businesses, which is not within our control. 99 residents have completed the entrepreneurship training program since 2013, and 3 businesses started post-training.


Provide access to employment and financial literacy opportunities to 25% of the youth and family residents in our communities by the end of 2015.

30 people attended financial literacy workshops.

Over 750 residents attended job fairs.

Hired a total of 104 youth.

Secured 303 job placements for residents.

Provided 60 participants with entrepreneur-ship training.

Provided access to employment opportunities to 11% of youth and family residents.

Supported 440 employment opportunities.

Employed 102 youth for YouthWorx.

In partnership with UPS, hosted a job fair with 37 residents offered employment.

Provided 2 entrepreneur-ship programs.

Provided access to employment opportunities to 7% of youth and family residents.


Employed 120 youth for YouthWorx.

In partnership with UPS, hosted a job fair with 16 residents offered employment.

Provided 39 participants with entrepreneurship training.

Provided access to employment for 18% of youth and family residents.


Hired a total of 326 youth for YouthWorx .

Provided 99 residents with entrepreneurship training.

...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 43


Fundraising Award 30 scholarships to residents annually.

Awarded 29 scholarships/ bursaries.

Awarded 34 scholarships.

Awarded 94 scholarships.

157 scholarships awarded over 3 years.

Fundraising Develop a $2.5M fund through fundraising to increase access and participation in neighbourhood opportunities.

Raised $580K. Activity was shifted to focus on other priorities.

Application to Canada Revenue Agency submitted to grant us special status to be able to issue charitable tax receipts.

Did not raise $2.5M but have continued to pursue partnership opportunities to increase resident access to programming and resources at the local level.

2.3 Strengthening Communities and Resident Leadership

Opportunities for Residents

Engage 5,000 residents in a broad range of opportunities.

1,937 residents engaged.



12,408 residents engaged in opportunities.

Community Spaces

Develop or support 11 multi-use/shared facilities operating through strategic partnerships and resident led groups to broaden access across the community.

11 sites identified.

4 sites were selected and a process is underway to complete gym upgrades at one site by the end of Q1 2015.

4 sites under development.

Leveraged opportunity with the City of Toronto to develop these sites.

11 sites identified and 4 sites under development.

2.4 Support Housing Stability

...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 44


Services for At-Risk Residents

Connect 600 residents to services that support housing stability.

Referred 800 active cases to Resident and Community Services.

Connected 1,102 at-risk residents to health, social service and community supports.

Connected 957 residents to supports.

Connected 2,859 residents to services.

Services for At-Risk Residents

Develop 10 partnerships in high needs buildings to provide housing supports for residents.

Developed 2 partnerships.

Developed 4 partnerships in high-needs buildings.

Developed 3 on-site partnerships in high-needs buildings.

Developed 9 partnerships.

Service Excellence

3.1 Provide Excellent Customer Service

Resident Satisfaction

Achieve a 75% overall resident satisfaction rating by 2015. Achieve a 15% increase in resident satisfaction with the quality and timeliness of services.



Results from 2015 Resident Survey showed overall resident satisfaction at 64% (68% in 2012).

81% of respondents said maintenance staff were respectful and 66% said repairs were done when they were told they would be done (80% and 62% respectively in 2012).

Did not achieve target but we took action to address concerns raised through the survey, including strengthening vendor management and providing more training for staff (see page 20).

...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 45


Service Requests Unresolved

Reduce the number of unresolved complaints by 10%.

The number of complaints that are unresolved within service level agreements (SLA) increased by 1%.

More work is needed to enable a more accurate measure for unresolved service requests.

A review of the complaints management process will be completed in 2016.

New benchmarks and targets will be set pending the review of the process in 2016.

3.2 Increase Revenues

Vacancy Increase occupancy rate to 98%.

Occupancy rate at 97.7%

Occupancy rate at 98%

Occupancy rate at 97.5%

Occupancy rate maintained at 98%.

Arrears Management and Eviction Prevention

Maintain an eviction rate below 1%.

Eviction rate at 0.67%



Eviction rate maintained below 1%.

Commercial Revenue

Increase commercial revenue by 3% per year.

Increased commercial revenue by 4%.

Increased commercial revenue by 3.5%.

Increased commercial revenue by 3%.

Increased commercial revenue by at least 3% per year.

Revenue Over Expenses

Increase the excess of revenue over expenses by 5% by Q4 2015.

Decrease of the excess of revenue over expenses by 9%.

Increase of the excess of revenue over expenses by 34.2%.

Decrease of the excess of revenue over expenses by 63.5%.

Did not achieve target of 5%.

Balanced budget each year and exceeded projected excess of revenue over expenses by $5.5M in 2015.

3.3 Demonstrate Value for Money and Public Accountability

Rent Calculation Accuracy

Improve rent calculation accuracy to 95%.




13 audit clerks were hired in late 2015. Results will be available in 2016.

...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 46


Building Level Budgets

Develop building level budgets.

Completed development level budgets.



Completed development level budgets every year.

Budgets approved by Board every year.

Regular Reporting

Provide regular, transparent reports on our finances.

Completed quarterly financial statements.



All quarterly financial statements provided to the Board.

...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 47

Appendix

Measures Definitions

1 Generate Capital Stability Sale of Houses This quarterly measure shows progress on the sale of stand-alone homes as approved by City Council and the Board. The criteria used to select houses included those properties with an estimated market value above $600,000 and any property that was vacant or in poor condition that required costly repairs. The results for “funds raised” include the proceeds from houses that have officially closed as well as those that have been committed under binding contracts in the current quarter and scheduled to close the next quarter. Mortgage Refinancing This annual measure shows progress on growing the state of good repair fund by refinancing mortgages.

2 Deliver an Innovative Capital Improvement Program Capital Program This quarterly measure shows the progress made on the delivery of both the planned and demand work of the capital repair program. The primary measure of performance against target is the dollar value of work completed as this measure aligns capital project progress with the capital budget. State of Good Repair: In You Unit and Common Areas This quarterly measure shows progress made on the state of good repair (SOGR) “in your unit” and “common area” program that targets kitchen and bathroom refurbishments, common space repairs and general livability enhancements. Participatory Budgeting This annual measure shows the funding of resident priorities that are aligned with overall capital needs through the participatory budgeting program, as well as the number of developments and projects on which the money was spent.

3 Grow the Revitalization Program Revitalization Communities

This quarterly measure shows progress towards building and replacing housing

units through revitalization, redevelopment and home ownership opportunities,

working with partners to enhance the value of aging assets.

...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 48

“Market” units are new full-priced ownership housing units developed in partnership with the private sector and sold on the open market. Toronto Community Housing receives land value and a share of profits from the sale of market units. “Rentals” are replacement units built to meet our commitment to replace older units demolished as part of revitalization. “Refurbishment” are rentals that are original units in revitalization communities that will be retained and refurbished through the revitalization. “Sales” mean deals executed for market buildings. “Design Development” are buildings and units actively under design (post master planning stage), but not yet on sale. “Construction” mean those that have demolition permits secured. Total of hard and soft costs including financing and land. “Occupied/Closed” means that households have moved into the unit (rental), and final closing of market units (i.e. payment received). Value represents a total of hard and soft costs excluding taxes, land, etc. Affordable homeownership This annual measures shows the number of households moved into affordable home ownership units, which are market nit purchases by residents through a homeownership funding program. Section 37

This quarterly measure refers to the part of the Planning Act that allows municipalities to obtain community benefits from developers in exchange for increased building height or density. Some ward councilors have obtained Section 37 benefits in the form of funding for capital investments in our communities. The funding is used for resident-identified priorities that benefit all residents of the building, such as improvements to common areas.

4 Focus on our Approach to Supporting Vulnerable Residents Connecting vulnerable residents This quarterly measure shows progress against our goal of improving the organization’s internal capacity to identify residents who are at risk and co-ordinate third party supports.

Partnerships for supports for residents Partnerships for supports for residents This annual measure shows progress against our goal of improving the organization’s internal capacity to identify residents who are at risk and co-ordinate

...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 49

third party supports through the development of partnerships in high needs buildings to provide housing supports for residents.

5 Renew our Resident Engagement System Engagement opportunities This annual measure shows an aggregate measure of the broad range of opportunities that we engage residents in, from governance to mentorship opportunities and youth programming. Multi-use Hubs This annual measure shows progress against our goal to work with the City and community partners to renew and promote the use and development of community space and assets with an emphasis on multi-use/shared facilitates to broaden access across the community. Economic Opportunities These annual measures reflect resident awareness and access to economic opportunities inclusive of entrepreneurship, mentorship, education and access to the labour market. Other / Resident Employment Support This annual measure tracks the development of a social procurement strategy that facilitates the ability to procure contracts that support resident employment, and business opportunities. Sponsorships and scholarships Toronto Community Housing is actively seeking to expand our revenue base to ensure programs and activities that support capacity building, education, access to employment and social programs are continually delivered. Pursuing sponsorship opportunities is a key mechanism to building a robust revenue stream. This annual measure tracks the number and dollar value of scholarships awarded to residents.

Divisional Objective: Neighbourhood Building and Improved

Community Safety Reported Crimes and Incidents This measure, taken from the CORA reporting system, demonstrates the volume of various crimes and incidents CSU attended to that occurred on Toronto Community Housing property.

...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 50

Crime Against Persons involve the application and or threat of force to a person. These include all sexual assaults, assaults, robbery, homicide, discharge firearm, uttering threats, etc.

Crime Against Property involve unlawful acts with respect to property but do not involve the use or threat of violence against a person. Included are theft, break and enter, trespass, mischief, arson, etc.

Incidents Affecting Quality of Life involve unlawful acts that are generally victimless in nature and include incidents that do not pose a direct threat to an individual but have an impact as to the perception of safety and fear of crime. These include drug offences, fire, fire alarm, prostitution, beach of probation, suspicious persons, cause disturbances, etc.

Other Incidents include information, unfounded incidents, assisting residents, parking, law enforcement, disputes, disturbances, etc.

Evictions for Cause This measure shows how many residents were evicted for “cause” in the reporting period, which is defined as evictions for causes other than arrears (i.e. substantial interference with reasonable enjoyment or with other rights, interests or privileges; damage to property; illegal act; or impairment of safety).

6 Develop our People to be Engaged and Capable Qualitative measures only.

7 Be a Landlord of Excellence Service Requests Response This quarterly measure is separated into Administrative and Maintenance requests and shows the volume and percentage of service requests received that are "resolved" within the committed turnaround time (two days for Administrative and five days for Maintenance) for the reporting period. Client Care Centre This quarterly measure shows performance in customer service as provided by the Client Care Centre.

Measures Definition Service Level Agreement (SLA) Target

All Service Levels are based upon a 90% target for responses.

Average Speed of Answer (ASA)

Average Time spent in queue before being answered. This is the average speed of answering an incoming call. It may

...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 51

also be known as the average delay of calls. This metric looks at the service level from the customer’s perspective.

Service Level Service Level is a function of ASA and SLA Response Targets.

Calls Offered Number of calls received.

Abandonment Rate Percentage of queued calls that hung up before reaching an agent.

CSU Dispatch Centre – Calls for Service This quarterly measure shows performance in customer service as provided by the Community Safety Unit’s Dispatch Centre to residents, staff and other external customers.

Measures Definition

Dispatched Calls The number or percentage of calls dispatched to CSU officers out of the total number of calls for service received.

Abandonment Rate

Percentage of queued calls that hung up before reaching a dispatcher (target is 8% or less)

Data limitation: The total number of calls obtained from the Avaya phone system does not include the calls that are generated by CSU officers/third party security services to report "on-site" follow up to occurrences/incidents via two-way radio. Arrears This quarterly measure shows arrears that include rent and parking balances, retroactive charges, and legal, maintenance and other charges.

Measures Definition

Arrears from Rent and Parking Only

Charges related exclusively to monthly rental charges and have been accumulated as a result of non-payment, month-over-month. Aging can be measured on these arrears.

Arrears from Retroactive Charges

Charges related to the discovery of undeclared income (for RGI tenants) and arrive in tenant files in large amounts ($1,700 on average) at specific times (vs. being accumulated over time). Aging cannot presently be measure on these arrears (system limitation).

...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 52

Arrears from Legal, Maintenance and Other

Charges related to additional tenant charges levied on the file in relation to a Landlord and Tenant Board Fee (i.e. $170 filing fee) or Tenant damage (to unit) fee. Aging cannot presently be measure on these arrears (system limitation).

This quarterly measure shows the outcome of our commitment to resolving arrears as early as possible by connecting with residents in order to prevent evictions whenever possible. “Evictions” include those evictions involving the Sheriff but also those that vacate the unit under various legal notices and orders. “Managed” arrears are those that are at a legal stage, beginning with an N4 notice, then repayment agreements, an L1 notice, or an Eviction Order. The Seniors Profile for Arrears shows arrears information for residents over the age of 59. “In Arrears Due to Loss of Subsidy” shows the number of seniors who are in arrears for reasons related to the loss of their rent-geared-to-income subsidy, commonly due to failure to report changes to income or household composition. Accessibility Improvements This annual measure shows progress made on meeting the accessibility needs of residents, measured through funds spent on capital upgrades, households accommodated for accessibility needs, and the number of buildings improved for accessibility purposes.

8 Improve Resident Satisfaction Closing the Loop Program This quarterly measure shows results from the “Closing the Loop” pilot program, in which staff contact residents following repairs to solicit feedback on the quality of repairs and of the service they received. After the scheduled completion of a repair, residents are contacted within five to seven days and are asked to: 1) confirm whether the repairs have been completed, 2) rate (out of 5) their satisfaction with the service provided, and 3) rate (out of 5) the attendee on courtesy and respect. Resident survey (bi-ennial) This measure is a rating of resident satisfaction with the overall delivery of our services. More information may be found at http://www.torontohousing.ca/residentsurvey.


...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 53

9 Ensure Long-Term Financial Sustainability Vacancy This quarterly measure shows vacancy rates and vacancy loss by Rent-Geared-to-Income and Market Units as well as by direct and contract managed portfolios. “Vacant Units” are defined as those units that are rentable and physically vacant at the end of each reporting period. “Vacancy Rate” is calculated by dividing the Total Vacant Units by the Total number of Rentable Units as at the last day of the reporting period. “Vacancy loss” is based on the number of vacant days during the month for each unit and the rent charged for each unit. Vacancy Aging This annual measure shows the percentage of rentable units that remain vacant at the defined age categories of <31 days, 31-60 days, and 61+ days. Turnover and Turnaround This quarterly measure shows the time it takes to “turnaround” or “turn” a unit from the point it is vacated by one resident to the point it is available for leasing to another. “Routine” turns refer to standard move-outs while “kitchen/bath” refers to those units that require significant repairs to assets before they are ready to be re-rented. Savings Through Procurement “Cost avoidance” is an industry standard procurement metric measured quarterly that monitors the efforts and impact of the Procurement Department and the value being generated. Procurement Cost Avoidance is predicated on the assumption that the competitive public procurement process conducted by the Toronto Community Housing procurement division is an intentional action that results in lower costs for goods, services and construction than would otherwise be obtained by the organization without such competition. Third Party Spend “Third party spend” is an annual measure defined as all spend with vendors for goods and services, excluding banks, government services, payroll and mandatory expenses. This is monitored to determine the amount of purchases made in the GTA that support the local economy (from which they were originally funded).

Commercial Revenue This annual measure shows the increase or decrease of commercial revenue per year. Commercial Revenue includes Retail, Antenna, Parking, Laundry, Cable TV, Internet, Home Phone, Advertising, Filming, Solar and Other sources.

...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 54

Divisional Objective: Communications Scorecard News Media Impact Score This quarterly measure tracks the public impact of media coverage of Toronto Community Housing. The score ranges from – 10 to + 10, with low scores signifying negative coverage and high scores positive coverage, while scores near the centre of the range represent balanced/neutral coverage. The impact score is calculated through a process involving weighting the tone score (assigned on a scale from -2 [strongly negative] to +2 [strongly positive]) according to the influence of the publication (a scale from 1 to 5, based on audience reach in the GTA). This type of weighting by tone and influence is an industry-standard method of estimating the impact of stories on the public at large.

q4 / annual performance report - toronto …...performance report > q4/annual 2015 status against...

Documents