Roundtable discussion on creating inclusive, people-centred housing services

Last month we partnered with our friends at Paper to host a roundtable discussion, exploring how we can create housing services that are efficient to operate and are inclusive and accessible for tenants. The session brought together experts from across the sector, including housing associations and local government and regional government, to share their experiences of the most pressing challenges they are facing, and where they have identified opportunities for progress and implemented effective action. We were also pleased to be joined by Dave Skinner and Dug Falby, who each spoke to us about current projects they’re working on, centred on design patterns for social housing, and how Large Language Models (LLMs) can enhance government services, respectively. 

Key themes from the discussion

Breaking free of silos is key to creating inclusive services

One of the central discussions of the day focused on the disconnect between how housing services are designed and how tenants experience them. Many services are built around organisational silos, but tenants encounter them holistically, which can lead to inefficiencies and gaps in support.

Dave Skinner made the point that housing services have yet to adopt user-centred design (UCD) principles as widely as public services, in part because of a lack of centralised standards driving compliance. Dave’s initiative, Design Patterns for Social Housing, aims to create a free, collaborative, community-driven resource for sharing best practices and service improvements.

Procurement is a key part of this too. It’s crucial for organisations to consider accessibility as a requirement from the outset, reducing the need to retrofit solutions later. Housing services should also be co-designed with tenants to ensure services are empowering rather than exclusionary. 

AI must be a tool for empowerment, not just efficiency

AI is increasingly becoming a focus for housing organisations, but the sector must resist the temptation to use AI for efficiency’s sake alone. Dug Falby showcased a prototype where AI supports small business owners in applying for grants by making the process less daunting. Dug framed how similar approaches could help tenants, such as those who don’t speak English as a first language, to navigate complex forms and access support more easily.

However, the challenge is ensuring that AI is integrated thoughtfully across entire organisations, rather than being developed in siloed pilots with incomplete data. Currently, many social housing organisations struggle with disorganised, unclean data. 

Organisations need to learn how to develop, manage, and use synthetic data. This is data created by LLMs using inference and extrapolation. One organisation is experimenting with AI to interpret large datasets, particularly in cases where early intervention and prevention are a priority. This shows how the technology can support proactive service models. But this is only possible if the underlying data is accurate, transparent, and well-governed. Without this, AI risks reinforcing bias and making housing services less accessible.

For AI to effectively enhance tenant experiences, housing organisations must approach it holistically. That means:

• Ensuring data quality before deploying AI models

• Embedding AI into whole-organisation strategies, not just isolated pilots

• Taking a user-centered approach to implementation that includes support teams and tenants

AI in housing isn’t just about automation; it’s about helping people access services, advocate for their needs, and navigate complex systems more easily. But for that to happen, the foundations need to be right. 

Moving upstream: the power of physical hubs

A key challenge for housing services is that they often operate reactively, addressing issues only when they reach crisis points. Our discussion focused on shifting towards proactive service models, like those increasingly seen in financial services, where early intervention can prevent crises later on.

The “Say it once” approach is being implemented by some local authorities to improve service integration. This model allows tenants to provide their information once, with support then triaged and directed efficiently, reducing friction and enabling faster resolutions.

One example of this kind of unified service was Disneyland’s approach to guest services. Across their global resorts, a guest with additional needs can speak to one person and receive coordinated support, from understanding access requirements to streamlining experiences across the park. It’s a model built on trust, continuity, and the freedom to act, ensuring guests have a seamless experience.

This principle extends beyond theme parks. When designed well, real-world service hubs can serve as beacons that are welcoming, human-centred, and responsive to the full context of a person’s life. They offer more than just access; they create trust and enable service providers to respond meaningfully to tenant needs. These hubs also serve as a vital mechanism for organisational learning, helping teams observe and adapt services to better meet the lived realities of tenants.

Making procurement an enabler, not a barrier

Procurement remains one of the biggest blockers to meaningful change in housing services. Currently, procurement decisions often prioritise off-the-shelf solutions that promise quick deployment rather than user-centred approaches tailored to actual needs (the long term costs of these procurements often only emerge long after the implementation team has gone). The challenge lies in shifting procurement processes to be more outcomes-driven, incorporating accessibility, inclusivity, and service design principles from the outset.

As an example, the Government of South Australia has developed accessible standards for ICT procurement, offering a potential model for the housing sector to follow. The idea of integrating AI into procurement to assess accessibility criteria was also raised, but with a cautionary note: AI can only add value if organisations are genuinely open to user-centred design, rather than treating it as a tick-box exercise.

Beyond portals… building services that work for people

Too often, service design is separate from strategic decision-making, leading to solutions that don’t reflect tenants’ real needs. To build trust and improve tenant experiences, housing providers must focus on continuous engagement. The ‘You said, we did’ approach, where organisations transparently show how tenant feedback leads to action, was highlighted as a way to foster accountability.

Ethical data collection and informed consent were also recurring concerns. Tenants should have the right to refuse data collection and be fully informed about how their information is used. Transparency and trust must be at the forefront.

As part of retrofit schemes to drive sustainability, tenants receive new devices, such as energy monitors that track heating usage, without joined-up guidance on how to use them. The result is that instead of driving improvements, these technologies can create confusion, lead to misuse, and ultimately increase digital exclusion.

While the intention is good—creating more sustainable, cost-efficient housing—the execution often overlooks the user experience. If tenants don’t understand the technology, they can’t benefit from it. In some cases, it even makes life harder. We need to be asking ‘Does this actually improve tenants' lives?’.

This also raised some concerns around data collection and informed consent. Many tenants are unaware of what data is being gathered about their energy use, who has access to it, or how it might be used. As citizens, they should have the right to refuse data collection. But in a system where power is imbalanced, do they feel they truly have that choice? There’s also the broader issue of data transparency and accessibility: do tenants have clear, easy access to their own energy data, and do they understand the risks associated with sharing it?

Ultimately, housing services need to be clear eyed about the data they are collecting from people and from the physical environment,considering the end-to-end experience of tenants. Co-designing with tenants from the outset ensures that technology empowers rather than alienates.

Rethinking research: ethics, power, and turning insights into action

One of the most challenging aspects of improving housing services is how organisations generate and act on insights from tenants. While talking to people is essential for understanding their needs, the power imbalance between housing associations, local authorities, and tenants complicates the process. Often, research is led by those within the organisation, who also hold decision-making power, raising ethical concerns about how information is gathered, synthesised, and used.

The ethics of housing research is an underexplored but critical issue. Many staff engaging with tenants are not trained in user research, which can result in unintentional bias, missed insights, or even harm. Some tenants may not feel they "deserve" to be heard, and others may feel pressured to participate, particularly when incentives are involved. There’s also a trust gap; for example, post-assessment feedback forms are often dismissed by tenants who don’t believe their responses will remain anonymous, leading to skewed data and lost learning opportunities.

To address these challenges, research needs to be built into success measures rather than treated as a one-off activity. Housing teams need clear, visible evidence of what ‘good’ looks like, with frameworks that empower teams to continuously learn and improve. “You said, we did” feedback loops can help establish credibility, but only if tenants see meaningful action taken in response.

Another challenge is ensuring insights lead to real change. Research findings often sit within silos, buried in reports rather than driving decision-making. Organisational structures can also pit teams against each other, competing for the same budgets, rather than encouraging collaboration. Instead of another "big slide deck" of a target operating model, the focus should be on whether the right people are designing and delivering services in the first place.

A more sustainable approach would be to embed multidisciplinary teams that bridge the gap between research, service design, and policy-making. A model similar to GDS could bring user-centred design expertise into the strategic level of housing organisations, ensuring that those gathering insights on the front line are properly supported.

Ultimately, this is not just a digital transformation—which implies an endpoint—but a continuous digital journey. The goal should be to move away from reactive, crisis-driven services towards an approach that prioritises prevention, collaboration, and human-centred design. And, crucially, we need to recognise that research isn’t just about external tenants. Internal teams are service users too, and their experiences also shape the success (or failure) of housing services.

What’s next?

The discussions highlighted key questions for organisations to take forward:

• How can we integrate service design into housing operations more effectively?
• How can we move beyond crisis management to proactive, preventative services?
• How do we ensure housing services are accessible, inclusive, and tenant-led?
• How can procurement processes support, rather than hinder, user-centred approaches?
• How do we empower tenants with informed consent, trust, and control over their data?

The social housing sector is evolving, shifting towards practical, user-centred improvements. By embedding service design at every level we can build housing services that are more inclusive, responsive, and effective.

If you have examples of best practices, challenges, or successes in designing better housing services, we’d love to hear from you: hello@nexerdigital.com

Key links:

Dave Skinner, Design Patterns for Social Housing: https://www.designpatternsforsocialhousing.co.uk/

Dug Falby, LLM-enhanced public services: https://ai.goodlookslikethis.com/

Paper open letter: Public Sector Procurement: A Race to the Bottom: Public Sector Procurement: A Race to the Bottom - Paper

Australia’s Public Procurement of Accessible Information and Communications Technology (ICT) PDF: https://accan.org.au/files/Policy%20Positions/PP%202022-23/220815-Accessible%20ICT%20Position%20Statement.pdf