Sandwell’s Tenant Engagement Strategy: Nice Words, Glossy Graphics — Now Where Are The Receipts?
Sandwell Council has produced its new Tenant Engagement Strategy 2025, covering April 2026 to March 2029.
Now, before anyone starts clapping like a seal at feeding time, let’s be fair.
The document says a lot of the right things.
Tenant voice.
Transparency.
Accountability.
Performance indicators.
Feedback loops.
“What you told us – What we did.”
Tenant scrutiny.
Tenant Auditor Group.
Tenants and Residents Associations.
SCIPS.
A “Tenant Approved” stamp.
All very warm. All very lovely. All very Sandwell.
But the question for tenants, leaseholders, TRAs and community groups is not whether the strategy looks good in a PDF.
The question is much simpler:
Will it change anything?
Because tenants have had strategies before. They have had consultations before. They have had meetings before. They have had “engagement” before.
What they have not always had is clear proof that when they raise issues, Sandwell Council listens, acts, reports back, and changes the service.
That is the test.
What the strategy says
Sandwell Council says it wants tenants to be at the heart of housing services. It says the key goals are to strengthen tenant voice, improve communication and transparency, make it easier to get involved, promote accountability through regular feedback and performance monitoring, and build trust between tenants and the Council.
The strategy says Sandwell has 27,781 council homes, including flats, houses, bungalows and maisonettes.
That is a huge housing service. So tenant engagement is not some fluffy add-on. It should be a core part of how the Council runs housing.
The strategy also says it was co-produced by a task and finish group of nine tenants, SCIPS, and Sandwell Housing team members.
Again, fine.
But co-produced by nine tenants is not the same as owned by nearly 28,000 households.
The big question is how this strategy now reaches the tenants who are not already in the room, not already in a TRA, not already on a panel, not already known to officers, and not already confident enough to challenge.
Sandwell admits it has work to do
To its credit, the strategy does admit where the Council needs to improve.
It says Sandwell needs to rebuild trust with tenants, provide timely and accurate feedback to tenant concerns, act promptly on lessons learned and viable tenant recommendations, raise awareness of tenant involvement, and reach underrepresented communities.
That matters.
Because buried beneath the polite language is the real issue:
tenants do not always trust the Council to act.
And frankly, who can blame them?
Repairs problems.
Complaint delays.
Damp and mould concerns.
Digital systems that do not always work for real people.
People not getting proper updates.
Tenants raising issues and then wondering where they disappeared to.
The Equality Impact Assessment says consultation feedback showed support for the strategy, but also scepticism about whether commitments would be kept, with people citing past failures to act on tenant input and unresolved repairs.
There it is in black and white.
Not from me.
Not from some bloke moaning on Facebook.
From the Council’s own paperwork.
Tenants are saying: “We have heard the promises. Now show us delivery.”
The “Tenant Approved” stamp — useful or rubber stamp?
One interesting bit is the proposed “Tenant Approved” stamp.
The strategy says this should only be used once tenants have had the opportunity to review, shape and agree the final version of a document.
That sounds good.
But there needs to be a proper process.
Who decides something is Tenant Approved?
How many tenants must be involved?
Which tenants?
From which areas?
Are dissenting views recorded?
Can a small familiar group approve something on behalf of everyone?
Can the Council use the stamp like a shiny badge to say “tenants approved this” when many tenants have never even heard of it?
Because if “Tenant Approved” just means “a few people in the system saw it and nobody threw a chair”, that is not tenant approval.
That is a rubber stamp with a nicer font.
SCIPS: important role, but independence must be clear
SCIPS is clearly part of the model. The strategy says TRA and community groups are delivered by SCIPS.
The strategy also includes a measure for annual satisfaction with the service provided by SCIPS, and describes SCIPS as commissioned by the Council to support new and existing Tenants and Residents Associations and community members.
Now, SCIPS may do good work. The evidence from meetings, newsletters and feedback suggests staff are active, helpful and well regarded.
But let’s not pretend there is no issue here.
SCIPS is often described as independent or as a critical friend. Yet it is also commissioned and funded by Sandwell Council to deliver part of the tenant engagement system.
That is not automatically wrong. But it does need sunlight.
If SCIPS is there to support tenants and challenge the Council, then tenants should be able to see:
what SCIPS challenged;
what Sandwell Council said in response;
what changed;
what did not change;
and what is still outstanding.
A proper annual “What We Challenged, What Changed” report would be a good start.
Because tenant engagement should not just be a noticeboard. It should be a lever.
TRAs need to use this strategy
For Tenants and Residents Associations, this document is useful because it gives you language to hold the Council to.
The strategy says the Council will publish clear service standards and performance indicators, require contractors and partners to support tenant engagement, offer meaningful engagement opportunities, be open to feedback, challenge and scrutiny, act on tenant feedback, and report back on outcomes.
So TRAs should not be shy.
Ask for the service standards.
Ask for the performance indicators.
Ask for the repairs figures.
Ask for complaint data.
Ask what has changed after your meetings.
Ask where your issues are recorded.
Ask who owns the action.
Ask when you will get an answer.
If several TRAs are raising the same issues, that is not “anecdotal”. That is a pattern.
And patterns should be recorded, escalated and tracked.
Where are the action plan and KPIs?
The strategy says an annual action plan created in partnership with tenants will support delivery. It says the key drivers will include participation rates, satisfaction scores and the diversity of tenants and leaseholders engaged.
That sounds promising.
So where is it?
Where is the action plan?
Who helped write it?
What are the actions?
Who owns them?
What are the deadlines?
What are the KPIs?
When will the first progress report be published?
Where will tenants see it?
The strategy says information will be shared regularly on the Tenant Engagement webpage, in the bi-monthly e-bulletin, and with SCIPS members. It also says performance will be reviewed quarterly by the Cabinet Member for Housing and the Tenant and Leaseholder Scrutiny Group, and also by the Safer Neighbourhoods and Active Communities Board.
Good.
Then publish it.
Not hidden in a meeting pack nobody sees.
Not buried in ModernGov like lost treasure.
Not summarised into corporate porridge.
Publish a simple tracker:
Issue raised.
Who raised it.
What the Council said.
Action agreed.
Owner.
Deadline.
Status.
Completed or not completed.
What changed.
That is accountability. Everything else is decoration.
Tenant panels and scrutiny groups
The strategy lists plenty of tenant engagement routes:
Tenant and Leaseholder Scrutiny Group.
Tenant Audit Group.
Resident Building Safety Forum.
Youth involvement.
Task and Finish Groups.
Consultations.
Communication Group.
Workshops.
Tenants Complaints Panel.
Annual Tenant and Leaseholder Conference.
TRA and community groups through SCIPS.
Again, good on paper.
But the public needs to know what these groups are doing.
Where are the Tenant Auditor Group reports?
Where are the recommendations?
Where are the Council responses?
Where are the minutes?
Where is the work programme?
How are tenants selected?
How are vacancies advertised?
How are dissenting views recorded?
If the Tenant Auditor Group has done work on repairs, damp and mould, complaints, ASB or choice-based lettings, then tenants should be able to read the reports.
Not just a summary.
Not just “tenants were involved”.
The actual report, with personal information redacted where necessary.
Otherwise we are back in the Sandwell fog machine.
Lots of engagement.
Lots of groups.
Lots of arrows on diagrams.
Not enough daylight.
Equality Impact Assessment: a few alarm bells
The Equality Impact Assessment says the strategy has positive impacts for various groups, including disabled tenants, older and younger tenants, carers, low-income tenants, minority communities, veterans, refugees and neurodivergent tenants.
It talks about reasonable adjustments, accessible venues, alternative formats, hybrid participation, travel expenses, translation and outreach. Again, good.
But then the EqIA says there are no adverse impacts requiring mitigation.
Really?
The same EqIA says consultation feedback raised digital exclusion, paper communication, trust concerns, unresolved repairs, underrepresented communities and accessibility issues.
Those are not imaginary risks. They are real barriers.
So why is the mitigation section effectively “N/A”?
If tenants struggle online, that is an access issue.
If people need paper communication, that is an access issue.
If disabled tenants cannot attend venues or meetings, that is an access issue.
If meetings are at times carers or working tenants cannot attend, that is an access issue.
If underrepresented communities are not reached, that is an access issue.
The Council cannot just say “inclusive” and expect the job to be done.
The big missing link: repairs and complaints
Tenant engagement cannot be separated from repairs and complaints.
If tenants are waiting months for repairs, if damp and mould cases are not sorted, if appointments are missed, if complaints are delayed, then all the engagement language in the world will not rebuild trust.
The strategy includes satisfaction that the landlord listens to tenants, keeps tenants informed, treats tenants fairly, handles complaints properly and contributes positively to neighbourhoods.
So repairs and complaints must be central to this strategy.
TRAs should be asking for regular figures on:
open repairs;
overdue repairs;
missed appointments;
first-time fix rate;
damp and mould cases;
complaints;
complaints upheld;
complaint response times;
contractor performance;
tenant satisfaction after repairs.
Not once a year. Regularly.
Because if the Council can produce performance reports for regulators and senior managers, it can produce a tenant-friendly version for the people living with the service.
What TRAs and tenants should ask now
Here are the questions I would be asking:
Where is the Tenant Engagement Strategy action plan?
Who helped write it?
What are the KPIs?
Where is the “What you told us – What we did” tracker?
Where are the Tenant Auditor Group reports and Council responses?
How does the “Tenant Approved” stamp work?
How many tenants must be involved before something is called Tenant Approved?
How will the Council reach tenants who are not online, not in TRAs and not already involved?
Will key meetings be hybrid for disabled tenants, carers and people who cannot attend in person?
What repairs and complaints data will be reported to tenants?
How will SCIPS show what it challenged and what changed?
When will tenants see the first public progress report?
Final thought
The Tenant Engagement Strategy is not useless. Far from it.
It contains enough promises to be useful.
But tenants, TRAs, SCIPS members and councillors now need to use it as a measuring stick.
When the Council says it will be transparent — ask for the dashboard.
When it says tenants will influence decisions — ask which decisions changed.
When it says “Tenant Approved” — ask who approved it.
When it says “What you told us – What we did” — ask where it is published.
When it says performance will be monitored — ask for the KPIs.
When it says it will rebuild trust — ask how, by when, and who is accountable.
Because Sandwell does not need another glossy document quietly filed away after the launch photos are taken.
It needs tenants with information, TRAs with evidence, SCIPS with teeth, councillors asking proper questions, and a Council that understands engagement is not the same as accountability.
Tenant engagement should not be a talking shop.
It should be tenants saying:
We raised it.
You recorded it.
You acted on it.
You told us what changed.
And if you did not act, you explained why.
That is the standard Sandwell Council has now set for itself.
Now let’s see if it can meet it.
#Sandwell #SandwellCouncil #TenantEngagement #TenantVoice #CouncilHousing #HousingRepairs #TenantRights #TenantScrutiny #TenantsAndResidentsAssociations #TRAs #SCIPS #SandwellCIPS #TenantAuditorGroup #TenantAndLeaseholderScrutiny #HousingAccountability #RepairsAndComplaints #DampAndMould #CouncilTransparency #WhatYouToldUsWhatWeDid #TenantApproved #PublicAccountability #LocalGovernment #WestBromwich #Wednesbury #Oldbury #Smethwick #Tipton #RowleyRegis
No comments:
Post a Comment