Progress has been made on racial equality, but female board members are still scarce
Housing associations have fewer female board members today than they did nine years ago, a survey by the Housing Corporation has found.

Women now make up 30% of boards, a drop of 3 percentage points on the last study in 1994. Boards are also overwhelmingly white – 85% – but registered social landlords are more successful than councils in recruiting black and minority-ethnic members: 9.5% of board members come from a minority group (excluding members of BME associations) compared with 2.5% of local councillors.

The survey of 3567 board members – almost half of the number in England – also showed that large-scale voluntary transfer board members were 95% white British, perhaps reflecting the rural nature of the first transfers.

Ian Perry, chief executive of Harvest Housing Group, said: "The Housing Corporation should concentrate on performance of boards and not necessarily their makeup. If you have a board made up of white, retired men and they make good decisions on diversity, then fine; if not, then something should be done."

The survey also found that housing associations should consider bringing in board members with IT and social services expertise.

Almost a fifth of RSL board members said their board needed a wider range of skills, in particular in IT, legal, architectural, construction and social services. The report said members with IT and social services skills would aid the transition to e-governance and the Supporting People funding regime.

Angela Ayton, head of governance at the corporation, said: "The fact that associations have identified it as an area [of concern] means many are on the case. We need to watch and see if this has changed."

Surprisingly, the survey did not ask whether board members were in favour of being paid even though the corporation lifted the ban on payment in July. However, many respondents did add their views to the questionnaire, and 61% opposed payment.

Ayton said: "We did not ask about payment because it's not the purpose of the survey. This was about the kind of people on boards and what motivates them to be there."

The opposition to payment may stem from the large number of board members on benefits, which could be adversely affected by receiving board payments.

Thirty-five per cent of board members surveyed were retired, 11% had an illness or disability and 83% of tenant board members did not work full-time.

Phil Morgan, chief executive of the Tenant Participation Advisory Service, said: "We are already seeing a situation where tenant board members are leaving boards because they think their benefits will be under threat."

Source

Housing Today