Let tenants choose how they speak up
There is a real danger by adopting the one-model-fits-all approach to scrutiny that housing providers could undo a lot of the tenant involvement that they have worked hard to achieve.
SIGN IN TO ACCESS THIS CONTENT
You've reached your monthly limit for unrestricted access to Inside Housing content. To get free unrestricted access simply sign in below, or register your details.
Sign In
If you are already registered sign in for unrestricted access to alll the content on the site.
Some consultancies are advising that the only way to achieve scrutiny is to set up a specific panel or ‘senate’ and that its members cannot take part in any of the organisation’s other participation structures.
This flies in the face of all the good practice that has gone before. With tenants being involved at whatever level they wish, through a menu of opportunity or involvement structure. If tenants are to scrutinise their landlord’s performance, a ‘what do we already do well’ approach makes more sense.
Building from this base by ensuring that tenants have the right skills, and information to scrutinise and challenge in an effective and positive (service improvement) way. This may mean that some tenants would not like a new senate-style panel and would like to use some or all of the existing structure to build a scrutiny model on.
Tenants who are not part of their landlord’s structures are not always well placed to scrutinise their services and there also needs to be strong links to other involved tenants and to those at grassroots. It is important that scrutiny and local offers are not confused, tenants (not just panel members) need to play a real role in setting out what a local offer will look like, what it would achieve and how it would be monitored.
Empowering tenants by working through the options they have for delivering scrutiny is exactly what the Tenant Services Authority’s involvement and empowerment standard is all about.
Mark Soundie, director, Enabling Housing Excellence