Research and analysis

Stakeholder survey results 2022 (accessible version)

Published 11 August 2022

Applies to England

Introduction

The Regulator of Social Housing has carried out a stakeholder survey, with fieldwork completed in March and April 2022.

We have sought the views of registered providers and other stakeholders on a range of issues.

Our last stakeholder survey was published in 2020. Due to the coronavirus pandemic, we did not conduct a survey in 2021.

In 2022 we changed the methodology we use in our survey to better reflect best practice. This included the addition of ‘neutral’ or ‘don’t know’ options for questions with choice scales.

As a result of these changes to the methodology, it is not possible to make direct comparisons between these data and those received in previous years.

We will use the results to inform

• our performance monitoring
• continuous development of our operational approach
• our corporate planning

Key findings

The number of responses was slightly higher than in 2020, but the types of organisations responding were broadly similar, with the majority being registered providers. We have seen a significant increase in the number of tenants responding compared to 2020.

The results remain positive, with at least 80% of respondents agreeing that:

• The regulatory framework and our approach to regulation are consistent with our objectives on economic regulation.

• They are aware of the regulator’s proposed high-level approach to implementing the regulatory changes outlined in the Social Housing White Paper.

• Our approach to regulation is risk-based and assurance-based.

• The regulator meets its objectives to be proportionate and minimise interference.

• They are clear about any information and / or evidence that they are asked to provide by the regulator.

• Our regulatory staff are knowledgeable about the nature and complexity of the sector.

79% of respondents agreed that:

• The regulator’s risk-based and assurance-based approach is reflected in their experience of being a regulated RP or how they understand RPs are regulated.
• The regulator’s approach is co-regulatory.
• The regulator takes action where possible to ensure that confidence in the sector is maintained, and access to finance on competitive terms continues.

78% of respondents found RSH publications very or somewhat useful.

77% agreed that the regulatory framework and our approach to regulation are consistent with our current objectives on consumer regulation.

76% said they were very or somewhat confident that the regulator will deliver the regulatory changes outlined in the Social Housing White Paper.

71% agreed that the regulator takes appropriate action in line with its current remit in response to referrals where the regulator finds consumer standards have been breached and tenants, or potential tenants, have been at significant risk of serious detriment.

Direct contact by letter or email remains by far the communication method preferred by stakeholders, with the website second and stakeholder events third.

Responses

409 stakeholders completed the survey, 43 more than in 2020.

330 (81%) of respondents were registered providers, including local authority registered providers, compared to 92% in 2020. 32 individual tenants completed the survey.

Other stakeholders who responded include: lenders, investors, or credit rating agencies, government departments, individual tenants, tenant organisations, and trade bodies.

Which of these stakeholder groups best describes your organisation?	Responses	Proportion of responses
Large Private Registered Provider	160	39%
Small Private Registered Provider	142	35%
Local Authority Registered Provider	28	7%
Lender, investor or credit rating agency	14	3%
Government department	13	3%
Individual tenant	32	8%
Tenant organisation	12	3%
Trade body	4	1%
Other	4	1%

Stakeholder group	number or responses
Large Private Registered Provider	160
Small Private Registered Provider	142
Local Authority Registered Provider	28
Lender, investor or credit rating agency	14
Government department	13
Individual tenant	32
Tenant organisation	12
Trade body	4
Other	4

Profile of registered provider respondents

Of the registered providers that responded, 160 were large private registered providers (>1,000 units), and 142 were small PRPs (<1,000 units).

28 responses were from local authority registered providers. This is similar to 2020 when 25 responses were received from local authority registered providers. For the first time, we have separated out LA registered provider results in our analysis.

72% of provider respondents classified themselves as housing associations.
12 for-profit providers responded (13 in 2020), 4% of the total number of respondents.

How many units does your provider own

Number of units	Total providers
<1000 units	142
1000-9999 units	91
10000-29999 units	37
30000-49999 units	20
50000+ units	12
Local authority	28

Section 1 - Regulatory Framework

Question 4: To what extent do you agree that:

Response	% Strongly agree	% Agree	% Neutral	% Disagree	% Strongly disagree
a. the regulator’s approach is co-regulatory	26	53	16	4	1
b. the regulator meets its objectives to be proportionate and minimise interference	28	53	14	4	1
c. the regulatory framework and our approach to regulation are consistent with our objectives on economic regulation	27	55	16	2	1
d. the regulatory framework and our approach to regulation are consistent with our current objectives on consumer regulation	21	56	18	4	0
Overall	25	54	16	4	1

Overall, 79% of respondents agreed with these statements, with only 5% disagreeing.

Section 2 - Delivery and Practice

Question 5: To what extent do you agree that:

Response	% Strongly agree	% Agree	% Neutral	% Disagree	% Strongly disagree
a. our approach to regulation is risk-based and assurance-based?	29	55	13	2	1
b. this approach is reflected in your experience of being a regulated RP or how you understand RPs are regulated?	28	51	17	2	1
Overall	29	53	15	2	1

Overall, 82% of respondents agreed with these statements.

Question 5 by stakeholder group

Group	% Strongly agree	% Agree	% Neutral	% Disagree	% Strongly disagree
Small PRP	20	56	21	2	1
Large PRP	44	46	6	2	2
LARP	11	77	13	0	0
Other	19	54	23	4	1

Question 7: How clear are you about any information and/or evidence you are asked to provide by the Regulator of Social Housing and why?

Overall, 81% of respondents were very or somewhat clear about the information or evidence requested and only 8% stated it was not clear. This includes responses received from other stakeholders who may not receive regular requests for information. This is reflected in the large (29%) “neutral” response from other stakeholders.

Question 7 by stakeholder group

Group	% Very clear	% Somewhat clear	% Neutral	% Not very clear	% Not clear at all
Small PRP	46	32	11	8	1
Large PRP	63	29	4	1	3
LARP	32	54	11	4	0
Other	25	34	29	12	1
Overall	48	33	12	6	2

Question 8: From engaging with our regulatory staff, how knowledgeable are they about the nature and complexity of the sector?

81% of respondents agreed that the regulator’s staff are knowledgeable about the complexity of the sector. This is up slightly from 79% in 2020 (where the response scale was the same).

This includes responses received from other stakeholders who may not have regular interaction with the regulator’s staff. This is reflected in the large (29%) “neutral” response from other stakeholders.

Question 8 by stakeholder group

Group	% Very knowledgeable	% Somewhat knowledgeable	% Neutral	% Requires improvement
Small PRP	42	32	16	10
Large PRP	59	31	3	6
LARP	57	30	13	0
Other	38	29	29	3
Overall	50	31	13	7

Section 3 - The regulator

Question 10: Please indicate how useful you find the following publications:

Publication	All Useful	Very useful	Somewhat useful	Neutral	Not very useful	Not useful at all
Annual Report	72%	29%	43%	23%	3%	2%
Codes of Practice	90%	53%	37%	7%	2%	1%
Consumer Regulation Review	84%	46%	38%	13%	2%	1%
Fees Statement	54%	18%	37%	38%	4%	3%
Global Accounts	66%	39%	28%	27%	5%	2%
Quarterly Survey	75%	31%	44%	20%	3%	2%
Regulating the Standards	89%	56%	33%	8%	2%	1%
Regulatory judgements / notices	84%	48%	36%	12%	3%	1%
Sector Risk Profile	84%	65%	19%	12%	3%	2%
Statistical Data Return	78%	33%	45%	15%	4%	2%
Value for Money Reports	78%	35%	43%	17%	4%	2%
Overall	78%	41%	37%	17%	3%	2%

78% found RSH publications very or somewhat useful and only 5% found them not useful.

The Codes of Practice were the most useful (90% very or somewhat useful, of which 53% was very useful).

Publication	Percentage of stakeholders who found it very useful or somewhat useful
Annual report	72%
Codes of Practice	90%
Consumer Regulation Review	84%
Fees Statement	54%
Global Accounts	66%
Quarterly Survey	75%
Regulating the Standards	89%
Regulatory judgements/notices	84%
Sector Risk Profile	84%
Statistical Data Return	78%
Value for Money reports	78%

Responses differed between stakeholder types, as would be expected given the different focus of stakeholders:

• 97% of large PRPs found the Sector Risk Profile very or somewhat useful with 89% finding it very useful. Regulating the Standards (96%) and the Codes of Practice (94%) were also reported as somewhat or very useful by large PRPs.

• 86% of small PRPs found the Codes of Practice very or somewhat useful.

• 96% of LARPs found the Codes of Practice very or somewhat useful.

• Only 35% of LARPs found the fees statement useful and 24% found the global accounts useful. These publications are predominantly about PRPs. A majority of LARPs were neutral about these publications (fees statement: 62%, global accounts: 72%).

• Other stakeholders found the Codes of Practice (88%) and Regulatory judgements / notices (86%) most useful, but found the more financial and technical documents less useful. In each case there were more ‘other’ respondents reporting a neutral response rather than finding them not useful. For example, 40% of other respondents were neutral on the fees statement compared to just 5% who found it not useful.

Very or somewhat useful	Large PRP	Small PRP	LARP	Other
Annual Report	74%	65%	75%	79%
Codes of Practice	94%	86%	96%	88%
Consumer Regulation Review	92%	75%	86%	82%
Fees Statement	53%	60%	35%	54%
Global Accounts	88%	52%	24%	60%
Quarterly Survey	89%	61%	63%	76%
Regulating the Standards	96%	84%	93%	82%
Regulatory judgements / notices	90%	74%	92%	86%
Sector Risk Profile	97%	72%	73%	82%
Statistical Data Return	83%	71%	89%	77%
Value for money reports	87%	69%	78%	75%
Overall	86%	70%	74%	77%

Question 11: To what extent do you agree or disagree that the regulator takes action where possible to ensure that confidence in the sector is maintained, and access to finance on competitive terms continues?

Strongly agree	31%
Agree	48%
Neutral	17%
Disagree	3%
Strongly disagree	1%

Overall, 79% of stakeholders agreed with this statement and only 9% disagreed.

Five stakeholders (1%) strongly disagreed with this statement.

Question 11 by stakeholder group

Stakeholder group	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly disagree
Small PRP	23	50	23	3	1
Large PRP	39	46	11	2	1
LARP	11	61	25	4	0
Other	34	43	14	6	3

Question 12:

Are you aware of the regulator’s proposed high-level approach to implementing the regulatory changes outlined in the Social Housing White Paper: The Charter for Social Housing Residents, which we set out in Our Principles and Approach?

Overall, 81% said that they are aware of the regulator’s proposed approach to implementing the regulatory changes outlined in the Social Housing White Paper.

Question 12 by stakeholder group

Stakeholder	% Yes	% Not Sure	% No
Small PRP	64	14	22
Large PRP	99	1	0
LARP	93	4	4
Other	70	13	18
Overall	81	8	11

Question 13: How confident are you that the regulator will deliver the regulatory changes outlined in the Social Housing White Paper?

Overall, 76% of responders were very or somewhat confident that the regulator will deliver on the regulatory changes.

Seven (2%) responders were not at all confident.

Question 13 by stakeholder group

Stakeholder group	% Very confident	% Somewhat confident	% Neutral	% Not very confident	% Overall
Small PRP	23	40	29	6	1
Large PRP	33	54	8	1	3
LARP	14	79	7	0	0
Other	32	39	14	15	0
Overall	28	48	16	6	2

Question 14: To what extent do you agree or disagree that the regulator takes appropriate action in line with its current remit in response to referrals where the regulator finds consumer standards have been breached and tenants, or potential tenants, have been at significant risk of serious detriment?

Strongly agree	25%
Agree	45%
Neutral	21 %
Disagree	7%
Strongly disagree	1%

Overall, 71% of stakeholders agreed with this statement.

Question 14 by stakeholder group

Stakeholder group	% Strongly agree	% Agree	% Neutral	% Disagree	% Strongly agree
Small PRP	18	43	36	4	0
Large PRP	32	47	11	8	3
LARP	14	75	7	4	0
Other	30	37	22	10	1

Question 15: Which of the following do you find helpful in getting information about the requirements of our standards, publications and any other news?

Direct contact by letter or e-mail remains the communication method preferred by stakeholders (93% very or somewhat helpful).

Views were more mixed on social media, with only 35% finding Twitter or LinkedIn very or somewhat helpful and 6% finding this method of communication unhelpful.

Method	Very or somewhat helpful
Letter/email	93%
Website information/alert	77%
Twitter/ LinkedIn	35%
Stakeholder event	73%
Trade press article/column	65%

Question 15 responses

Method	Very helpful	Somewhat helpful	Neutral	Not very helpful	Unhelpful
Letter/email	67%	26%	5%	1%	0%
Website information/alert	37%	40%	16%	6%	1%
Twitter/LinkedIn	9%	26%	35%	23%	6%
Stakeholder event	39%	33%	22%	4%	1%
Trade press article/column	19%	46%	25%	7%	2%