Stakeholder Communications Research October 2025

Summary of findings

• The Scottish Housing Regulator (SHR) is the independent regulator of Registered Social Landlords (RSLs) and local authority housing services in Scotland, established under the Housing (Scotland) Act 2010. Its statutory objective is to safeguard and promote the interests of current and future tenants of social landlords, people who are or may become homeless, and people who use housing services provided by RSLs.
• As in 2022 stakeholders continue to use all of SHR’s communication channels, with the website and publications again the sources used most frequently. Direct contact from SHR, publications and the website were rated as the most useful sources of information, with the SHR X account used least and receiving the lowest usefulness ratings.
• Most stakeholders felt that the amount, frequency and quality of information provided by SHR were about right, with increases since 2022 in the proportion rating the quality of information as “very good”.
• Feedback on regulatory publications remained very positive. Statutory Guidance received the strongest ratings, with most stakeholders also rating Advisory Guidance, Thematic Inquiries, Regulatory Financial Analysis and Reports on Statutory Interventions as very or fairly useful. Topic coverage was generally viewed as appropriate across the regulatory suite, although some respondents—particularly landlord/trade bodies—felt Thematic Inquiries could cover a wider range of topics.
• Charter publications similarly attracted strong feedback. All were rated as very useful by most respondents, with increases in “very useful” ratings since 2022. Most felt the range of topics and level of detail were about right, though some would like more detail in the Comparison Tool and individual landlord reports.
• Information products such as website news items, the SHR Update and the annual report were also considered useful. Website news items in particular showed a significant rise in “very useful” ratings.
• There was continued support for improvements made to SHR’s communications in recent years. Most stakeholders agreed that the website is clear and easy to read (an increase since 2022), with only a small minority stating that they find it difficult to navigate and to locate specific information. Feedback on publications remained positive, especially the inclusion of short summaries, although respondents were more likely to describe the language as “fairly” rather than “very” clear.
• The findings also highlight several areas where further enhancement could strengthen SHR’s communications, including improving downloadability and website navigation, expanding benchmarking and data tools, providing clearer and more detailed analysis where needed, and exploring the use of AI-driven tools to improve accessibility and usability of SHR’s data and publications 

SHR's information

SHR Information: Methods

Almost 9 in 10 use the SHR Website and publications often, an increase since 2022.

The website and publications were by far the most frequently used sources, followed by direct contact from SHR.

In contrast, no respondents said they used the SHR X account (formerly Twitter) often, and only 13% reported using it occasionally.

Compared with 2022, higher proportions reported using the website, SHR publications, or having direct contact from SHR often.

• SHR website - 89% yes, use often, 11% yes, use occasionally  
• SHR publications - 89% yes, use often, 11% yes, use occasionally  
• Direct contact from SHR - 64% yes, use often, 35% yes, use occasionally
• Through representative organisations - 44% yes, use often, 49% yes, use occasionally
• SHR Update (e-newsletter) - 41% yes, use often, 49% yes, use occasionally 
• Articles about SHR in housing e-zines - 34% yes, use often, 45% yes, use occasionally 
• Conference speeches - 20% yes, use often, 66% yes, use occasionally 
• SHR X Account - 0% yes, use often, 13% yes, use occasionally 

SHR information: usefulness

Stakeholders rated direct contact from SHR, SHR publications and the website as most useful.

Although all information sources were rated ‘very’ or ‘fairly’ useful by over half of respondents, the highest ratings were given to direct contact from SHR, publications, and the website.

In contrast, articles about SHR in housing e-zines were more often rated ‘fairly’ rather than ‘very’ useful, and the SHR X account received the lowest ratings overall.

Comparing 2022 and 2025, the most notable change was a decline in the percentage of respondents rating communications through representative organisations as ‘very useful’.

• Direct contact from SHR - 86% very useful, 13% fairly useful
• SHR Publications - 77% very useful, 23% fairly useful
• SHR Website - 75% very useful, 23% fairly useful
• Through representative organisations - 44% very useful, 48% fairly useful
• SHR Update - 40% very useful, 40% fairly useful
• Conference speeches - 35% very useful, 47% fairly useful
• Articles about SHR in housing e-zines - 17% very useful, 75% fairly useful
• SHR X account - 15% very useful, 46% fairly useful

SHR information: methods 

Around half consider the website to be the most effective way of getting information about SHR’s work.

When asked to select the one source they felt was the most effective way to find out about SHR’s work, almost half chose the website, while nearly a quarter selected direct contact from SHR.

A similar question was asked in 2022, but the response options were more limited, so results are not directly comparable. However, it is notable that in 2022 the SHR Update received the highest rating (44%), while fewer selected the website (40%).

The response profile was similar across stakeholder groups, with the website most often chosen as the best channel by all groups except landlord/trade associations, who generally preferred direct contact.

• SHR Website – 47%
• Direct contact from SHR – 23%
• SHR Publications – 13%
• SHR Update -12%
• Through representative organisations – 2%
• Articles about SHR in housing e-zines – 1%
• Conference speeches – 0%

SHR information: amount

9 in 10 stakeholders feel that SHR produces the right amount of information.

Most respondents (90%) in 2025 felt that the amount of information available from SHR is about right.

However, 8% said too little information is available (a mix of stakeholder types within this small group), while 2% said too much information is available (two respondents, both registered social landlords).

The proportion stating the amount of information provided is about right was slightly higher than in both 2018 and 2022.

• Too much – 2025 2%, 2022 3%, 2018 4%
• About right – 2025 90%, 2022 85%, 2018 86%
• Too little – 2025 8%, 2022 12%, 2018 8%

SHR information: frequency

While most feel SHR produces information at the right frequency, around 1 in 10 would like it more often.

Most respondents (88%) in 2025 said that the frequency of SHR publications and statistics is ‘about right’.

However, 11% felt that this information is not provided often enough (with a mix of stakeholder types giving this response).

Broadly similar responses were recorded in previous survey years.

• Too often – 2025 1%, 2022 3%, 2018 2%
• About right – 2025 88%, 2022 83%, 2018 92%
• Not often enough – 2025 11%, 2022 13%, 2018 5%

SHR information: quality

Overall, most stakeholders rate the quality of information from SHR as good or very good.

Most respondents (92%) in 2025 rated the quality of information from SHR positively, with a notable increase in the proportion giving the top rating of ‘very good’ (rising from 25% in 2022 to 34% in 2025).

Most of the remaining respondents (7%) rated the information as ‘neither good nor poor’, while 1% rated it as ‘poor’.

• Very good – 2025 34%, 2022 25%
• Good – 2025 58%, 2022 57%
• Neither good nor poor – 2025 7%, 2022 16%
• Poor – 2025 1%, 2022 2%
• Very poor – 2025 0%, 2022 0%

SHR communications and publications

Usefulness of regulatory publications

Most SHR regulatory publications are rated as useful.

Statutory Guidance received the most positive feedback, rated as ‘very useful’ by over four in five respondents.

Other publications receiving predominantly positive feedback were Advisory Guidance (64% ‘very useful’), Thematic Inquiries (63%), Regulatory Financial Analysis (63%), and Reports on Statutory Interventions (57%).

These high levels of positive feedback are consistent with the 2022 survey, although some results are not directly comparable due to changes in the list of publications evaluated.

The remaining publications were more frequently rated as neutral in terms of usefulness, which may reflect their specialist focus.

• Statutory Guidance - 84% very useful, 15% useful
• Advisory Guidance - 64% very useful, 33% useful
• Thematic Inquiries - 63% very useful, 34% useful
• Regulatory Financial Analysis - 63% very useful, 32% useful
• Reports on Statutory Interventions - 57% very useful, 38% useful
• Statement of Compliance with Public Services Reform - 13% very useful, 38% useful
• Corporate Parenting Plan and Children’s Rights Report – 10% very useful, 28% useful
• Biodiversity Report – 8% very useful, 26% useful

Range of topics covered in regulatory publications

The level of detail provided in most regulatory publications is also rated highly by the majority of users.

Statutory Guidance, Advisory Guidance, Regulatory Financial Analysis and Reports on Statutory Interventions all received strong feedback, with around nine in ten stakeholders saying the range of topics covered was ‘about right’.

While feedback on Thematic Inquiries was also predominantly positive, around one in seven respondents felt this publication covered too few topics. Although this view was shared across stakeholder types, it was particularly common among landlord/trade representative organisations (60%).

The remaining publications attracted a much higher proportion of ‘Don’t Know’ responses, suggesting many respondents had not used them enough to provide an opinion.

• Statutory Guidance - 1% too many topics, 93% about right, 5% too few topics, 1% don't know 
• Advisory Guidance - 5% too many topics, 91% about right, 3% too few topics, 1% don't know 
• Regulatory Financial Analysis - 0% too many topics, 91% about right, 3% too few topics, 5% don't know
• Reports on Statutory Interventions - 0% too many topics, 89% about right, 6% too few topics, 4% don't know
• Thematic Inquiries - 1% too many topics, 79% about right, 14% too few topics, 5% don't know 
• Statement of Compliance with the Public Service Reform (Scotland) Act - 3% too many topics, 52% about right, 4% too few topics, 42% don't know 
• Corporate Parenting Plan and Children’s Rights Report - 3% too many topics, 38% about right, 2% too few topics, 57% don't know 
• Biodiversity Report - 3% too many topics, 37% about right, 3% too few topics, 56% don't know 

Main uses of regulatory publications

The most common uses of regulatory publications were to ensure compliance and to find out about landlord performance.

Regulatory publications are used in a variety of ways.

As in 2022, the main uses are to support compliance, performance management, and governance.

Compared with 2022, a higher percentage reported using these publications to support research (rising from 31% to 44%).

Uses varied by stakeholder type, including:

• Higher use to inform/support governance and to support policy development among registered social landlords (98% and 82% respectively).
• Higher use to ensure compliance with regulatory standards among local authorities (100%).
• To ensure compliance with Regulatory Standards – 2025 94%, 2022 89%
• To find out about landlord performance / benchmarking – 2025 88%, 2022 83%
• To inform/support governance – 2025 82%, 2022 83%
• To inform discussions about landlord performance – 2025 75%, 2022 70%
• To support policy development – 2025 75%, 2022 68%
• To support research – 2025 44%, 2022 31%

Usefulness of charter publications

Feedback on Charter publications is predominantly positive and has increased since 2022.

Feedback on the usefulness of charter publications was also predominantly positive, with all publications rated as ‘very useful’ by most respondents.

Notably, the proportions giving a ‘very useful’ rating increased compared with 2022.

• Guidance for landlords on how to complete the Annual Return on the Charter/ Charter technical guidance  - 74% very useful, 22% fairly useful
• Statistical information - 70% very useful, 29% fairly useful
• Comparison Tool - 69% very useful, 25% fairly useful
• Individual Landlord Reports - 63% very useful, 34% fairly useful
• The National Report on the Scottish Housing Charter - 60% very useful, 36% fairly useful

Range of topics covered in Charter publications

The vast majority felt the range of topics covered in Charter publications was about right.

Feedback on the range of topics covered in charter publications was also predominantly positive, with over four in five respondents rating each publication as covering an appropriate range of topics.

Feedback on guidance for landlords and statistical information was particularly positive. However, a notable minority wished to see a wider range of topics in the individual landlord reports (11% selecting ‘too few topics’) and in the comparison tool (14%).

Similar results were recorded in the 2022 survey. 

• Guidance for landlords on how to complete the Annual Return on the Charter/ Charter technical guidance  - 2% too many topics, 91% about right, 3% too few, 3% don't know
• Statistical information - 0% too many topics, 91% about right, 7% too few, 2% don't know
• The National Report on the Scottish Housing Charter - 0% too many topics, 88% about right, 7% too few, 5% don't know
• Individual Landlord Reports - 0% too many topics, 86% about right,11% too few, 3% don't know
• Comparison Tool - 1% too many topics, 83% about right,14% too few, 2% don't know

Level of detail in Charter publications

While most are satisfied with the level of detail, a minority would like to see more detail, especially in the Comparison Tool.

Respondents were generally satisfied with the level of detail in Charter publications.

However, around a fifth felt there was too little detail in the Comparison Tool (21%), while around a tenth said the same about the Individual Landlord Reports and the National Report on the Scottish Housing Charter (11% and 10% respectively).

Results show a slight improvement on the 2022 survey when 17% said there was too little detail in the Landlord Reports, and 13% felt there was too little detail in the Statistical Information.

• Statistical Information - 2% too much, 88% about right, 7% too little, 3% don't know
• National Report on the Scottish Housing Charter - 3% too much, 84% about right, 10% too little, 3% don't know
• Individual Landlord Reports -  0% too much, 85% about right, 11% too little, 4% don't know
• Comparison Tool -  0% too much, 76% about right, 21% too little, 3% don't know

Main uses of Charter publications

Charter publications are most commonly used to support landlord performance management.

The most common use of Charter publications is performance management: 94% use them for benchmarking, and 86% use them to inform discussions about landlord performance.

Compared with 2022, usage to inform discussions about landlord performance, to support policy development, and to support research increased.

Uses varied by stakeholder type, including higher use among registered social landlords to find out about landlord performance/benchmark and to inform/support governance (96% and 90% respectively).

• To find out about landlord performance or use for benchmarking – 2025 94%, 2022 90%
• To inform discussions about landlord performance – 2025 86%, 2022 77%
• To inform/support governance – 2025 76%, 2022 70%
• To ensure compliance with the Charter Standards – 2025 74%, 2022 74%
• To support policy development – 2025 68%, 2022 58%
• To support research – 2025 44%, 2022 37%

Usefulness of information products 

Stakeholders generally found SHR information products useful, especially the website news items.

While feedback on the usefulness of information products was generally positive, website news items were the only channel rated ‘very useful’ by over half of respondents, with the other products more often rated ‘fairly useful’.

Compared with 2022, the proportion rating website news items as ‘very useful’ increased from 36% to 595 while the proportion rating the National Panel of Tenants and Service User reports at this level increased from 16% to 27%.

• SHR website news item - 59% very useful, 31% fairly useful
• SHR Update - the e-newsletter - 36% very useful, 46% fairly useful
• Annual Report and Accounts - 29% very useful, 43% fairly useful
• National Panel of Tenants and Service Users Reports - 27% very useful, 53% fairly useful

Range of topics covered in information products 

Most stakeholders rated the range of topics covered in information products as being at the right level.

Feedback on the range of topics covered in information products was also predominantly positive, with over four in five respondents rating the annual report, website news items and the SHR Update as covering an appropriate range of topics.

Nine per cent felt that the website news items covered too few topics, with this view expressed across a range of stakeholder types.

Three in ten respondents selected ‘Don’t Know’ for the National Panel of Tenants and Service User reports, but among those who provided a rating, most said the range of topics was ‘about right’.

Similar results were recorded in the 2022 survey.

• Annual Report and Accounts - 2% too many topics, 89% about right, 2% too few, 6% don't know
• SHR website news items - 2% too many topics, 85% about right, 9% too few, 3% don't know
• SHR Update - the e-newsletter - 1% too many topics, 83% about right, 4% too few, 12% don't know
• National Panel of Tenants and Service Users - 2% too many topics, 64% about right, 3% too few, 30% don't know

Overall usefulness of publications

Statutory guidance is by far the most frequently selected ‘most useful’ product.

When asked to select SHR’s three most useful publications, Statutory Guidance was by far the most frequently chosen, selected by 73% of respondents—including all tenant/service user representative and advocacy organisations, and 81% of registered social landlords.

In contrast, the publications least likely to be selected among the top three were the National Report on the Scottish Housing Charter, the SHR Update/e-newsletter, and the National Panel of Tenants and Service Users reports.

Results are not directly comparable with the 2022 survey, as a different list of publications was tested (Regulatory Guidance was selected most often in 2022 at 59%).

• Statutory Guidance - 73%
• Guidance for landlords on how to complete the Annual Return on the Charter / Charter technical guidance - 36%
• Charter: Statistical Information - 32%
• Thematic Inquiries (e.g. homelessness, gas safety, Gypsy/Travellers minimum site standards, etc.) -  28%
• Charter: Comparison Tool - 27%
• Advisory Guidance (e.g. advice letters, how we work – complaints and serious concerns) - 23%
• Regulatory Financial Analysis (e.g. RSL finances, loan portfolio summary) - 20%
• SHR Website news items - 16%
• Reports on Statutory Interventions - 14%
• Charter: Individual Landlords Reports - 13%
• Charter: The National Report on the Scottish Housing Charter - 10%
• SHR Update – the e-newsletter - 5%
• National Panel of Tenants and Service Users reports - 2%

SHR website

Overall rating

Most rated the website as ‘good’ or ‘very good’, with very few negative ratings and some neutral responses.

Feedback on the SHR website was largely positive, with around four in five respondents (79%) rating it as either ‘very good’ or ‘good’.

The proportion giving the top rating of ‘very good’ also increased compared with 2022 (rising from 12% to 22%).

Very few—only 3%—rated the website as poor or very poor. The remaining 19% were neutral.

• Very good - 2025 22%, 2022 12%
• Good – 2025 57%, 2022 60%
• Neither good nor poor – 2025 19%, 2022 22%
• Poor – 2025 2%, 2022 5%
• Very poor – 2025 1%, 2022 1%

Detailed evaluation

The vast majority agree that the website is clear and easy to read. Ratings on clarity and ease of use improved since 2022.

Responses to the more detailed evaluation of the website were also largely positive, with the vast majority (89%) agreeing that information is clear and easy to read, and around three in four (73%)  agreeing that it is easy to browse. Agreement with both statements has increased since the 2022 survey.

Opinions on other aspects were more varied. Around a third said they neither agreed nor disagreed that the website works well on different devices - this suggests that these respondents hadn’t tried this feature.

Also, a notable 18% did not agree that it was easy to find the information they wanted. While this is a similar percentage to that seen in 2022, it is positive to note that an increased percentage agreed with the statement suggesting this area has improved.

• The information on the website is clear and easy to reach – 21% Strongly agree, 68% Agree, 6% Neither agree/nor disagree, 5% Disagree
• The website is easy to browse – 16% Strongly agree, 57% Agree, 10% Neither agree/nor disagree, 15% Disagree
• The website works well on different types of device - 11% Strongly agree, 56% Agree, 32% Neither agree/nor disagree, 1% Disagree
• It is easy to find the information I want on the website - 19% Strongly agree, 47% Agree, 15% Neither agree/nor disagree, 18% Disagree

SHR overall communications style and improvements

SHR publications: Overall ratings

Overall feedback is positive, especially in relation to length and use of summaries. There may be room for improving clarity of language.

Considering all of SHR’s publications together, feedback on length, clarity of language and use of summaries was largely positive.

However, respondents were more likely to rate the language as ‘fairly’ rather than ‘very’ clear, suggesting some scope for improvement.

There were some variations by stakeholder group, including:

• More mixed views on length among landlord/trade representative organisations (40% stating ‘too short’).
• More mixed views on clarity among local authorities (80% rating the language as ‘fairly clear’).
• Length – 6% too long, 89% about right, 3% too short, 2% don’t know
• Clarity of language – 34% very clear, 62% fairly clear, 3% not very clear, 0% not at all clear, 1% don’t know
• Use of short summaries/ key findings – 62% very helpful, 36% fairly helpful, 1% not very helpful, 0% not at all helpful, 1% don’t know

SHR communications: Suggested changes to communications

Asked to suggest improvements, while most said nothing, suggestions included further improvements to the website navigation and data tools.

Themes mentioned were as follows – note the relatively small percentages of stakeholders mentioning each area (66% of respondents did not suggest any other improvements):

• Changes to downloadability & formats - 12% mentioned – Requests for publications to be downloadable or printable (e.g. PDF/Word). Some respondents expressed frustration, believing the function had been removed.
• Improved navigation & search on website – 10% mentioned – The website was described by some as difficult to navigate, with an inefficient search function and unclear pathways to certain tools and publications.
• Benchmarking & data tools – 6% mentioned – some suggestions for improved comparison tools (more landlords, full ARC data, financial stats), better use of Power BI, and more accessible ways to interrogate raw data.
• Depth & clarity of publications – 5% mentioned – Requests for more detailed reports and clearer interpretation of emerging issues.
• Content relevance – 4% mentioned – Clearer prioritisation of content, more tenant-relevant news, and fuller UK regulatory context.
• Timeliness & more proactive communication – 3% mentioned – Need for quicker updates, more proactive communications.

SHR website: New ways of sharing information

Around 1 in 4 support the use of new approaches such as AI to make information from SHR more accessible.

23% would like to engage with the information SHR publish in new or different ways.

Almost a quarter of respondents supported the use AI tools and technologies to improve the accessibility of data and information published by SHR with a number of specific suggestions made.

Final summary and conclusions

Background

The Scottish Housing Regulator (SHR) commissioned JRS to undertake a further survey of its communications to understand how stakeholders use its publications and the value they place on its communications. The findings will inform SHR’s future communications approach and strategy.

The survey was conducted online, using a questionnaire designed in consultation with SHR. SHR provided 238 stakeholder contacts covering registered social landlords, local authorities, representative and advocacy bodies, lenders and funders, auditors and other regulatory bodies. A total of 97 responses were received.

Communications methods

SHR communicates with stakeholders in a range of ways, including its website, publications, website news items, the SHR Update newsletter, social media, conference presentations and direct contact.

Stakeholders continue to use all of these communication channels. The most commonly used remain the SHR website and SHR publications, which were used often by almost nine in ten respondents—an increase since 2022. Direct contact from SHR was also frequently used.

By contrast, very few respondents used the SHR X (formerly Twitter) account; none used it often and only a small minority used it occasionally.

When asked to select the single most effective way to find out about SHR’s work, almost half chose the website and almost a quarter chose direct contact from SHR. The response pattern was broadly similar across stakeholder groups, although landlord/trade representative bodies tended to favour direct contact.

SHR information - overview

Most stakeholders remain satisfied with the overall volume, frequency and quality of SHR information.

Nine in ten felt the amount of information provided was about right—slightly higher than in 2022. Similarly, almost nine in ten believed publications and statistics were issued at an appropriate frequency.

Overall quality ratings were very positive. More than nine in ten rated the quality of information as either good or very good, and the proportion choosing the top rating of “very good” increased from 25% in 2022 to 34% in 2025. Only a very small minority rated information quality as poor.

SHR publications

Stakeholders continued to find SHR publications useful, with the strongest positive feedback received for the regulatory publications. Statutory Guidance was rated particularly highly, with over four in five rating it as very useful. Advisory Guidance, Thematic Inquiries, Regulatory Financial Analysis and Reports on Statutory Interventions also received predominantly positive feedback.

Most respondents felt that the range of topics covered in regulatory publications was about right. The main exception related to Thematic Inquiries, where around one in seven felt too few topics were covered. Other publications attracted a higher proportion of “don’t know” responses, suggesting lower levels of use or familiarity.

Regulatory publications were used for a range of purposes, most commonly to ensure compliance with regulatory standards, to support performance management, and to inform governance. A higher proportion than in 2022 reported using these publications to support research.

Feedback on Charter publications was also very positive. A majority rated each as very useful, with increases across all products compared with 2022. Most respondents felt that the range of topics covered was appropriate, though a notable minority would like to see more topics covered in the Comparison Tool and Individual Landlord Reports. While most were content with the level of detail in Charter publications, around a fifth wanted more detail in the Comparison Tool.

Charter publications were mainly used for performance management, benchmarking and informing discussions about landlord performance. A slightly higher proportion than in 2022 reported using them to support policy development and research.

Among information products, website news items were the only channel rated “very useful” by more than half of respondents. Ratings for other information products were positive overall but more commonly in the “fairly useful” category.

When asked to select the three most useful types of SHR publications, the clear leader was Statutory Guidance, selected by almost three-quarters of respondents. Publications such as the National Report on the Scottish Housing Charter and the SHR Update newsletter were least frequently selected.

Overall feedback on SHR’s publications as a whole was also positive, particularly regarding length and the use of short summaries. Respondents were more likely to describe the language used as “fairly” clear than “very” clear, indicating some potential to further improve clarity.

SHR website

The SHR website continues to attract broadly positive feedback. Around four in five rated it as good or very good, and the proportion giving the top rating increased notably since 2022. Most respondents agreed that information is clear and easy to read and that the website is easy to browse. However, some still found it difficult to locate the information they needed, and around a third were unsure whether the site worked well across different devices.

Potential improvements

While many stakeholders did not identify any further improvements needed. Among the suggestions made, the most common related to making documents easier to download or print, improving website navigation and search functionality, enhancing benchmarking and data tools, increasing the depth and clarity of publications, and improving the timeliness and proactivity of communications.

Around a quarter of respondents also supported exploring the use of AI tools and technologies to improve access to and interrogation of SHR data, including AI-driven search, interactive benchmarking tools, and automated summaries or insights.

Appendix: Method

An online quantitative survey method was used.

SHR provided 238 stakeholder contacts comprising:

• Registered social landlords
• Local authorities
• Landlord representative and professional trade organisations
• Registered Regional Tenant Networks
• Key advocacy organisations
• Lenders and funders
• Auditors
• Other regulators

Fieldwork was undertaken from 2nd October to 7th November 2025 with a final achieved sample of 97 responses (a survey response of 41%).

Details of the sample profile are shown below.

All work was carried out in accordance with ISO 20252 guidelines and the MRS Code of Conduct.

Data collection

• The data was collected by online survey
• The target group for this research study was Scottish Housing Regulator stakeholders
• The sampling frame used for this study was a listing of stakeholder contacts provided by SHR.
• The sample type was probability. All contacts on the listing were invited to take part in the survey.
• The target sample size was c100 and the final achieved sample size was 97.
• Fieldwork was undertaken between 2 October – 7 November 2025
• All persons on the sampling frame were invited to participate in the study. Respondents to paper and internet self-completion studies are self-selecting and complete the survey without the assistance of a trained interviewer. This means that JRS cannot strictly control sampling and, in some cases, this can lead to findings skewed towards the views of those motivated to respond to the survey.
• The overall response rate to the survey was 41%. This response rate is typical for a survey where respondents are interested in the topic and motivated to respond.

Data analysis

• The final data set was not weighted.
• The overall sample size of 97 provides a dataset with a margin of error of between ±2% and ±10%, calculated at the 95% confidence level (market research industry standard).

 Quality assurance

• For CAWI Questionnaires these checks include:
• Responses are checked for duplicates where unidentified responses have been permitted.
• All responses are checked for completeness and sense.
• Specific quality checks to be conducted during fieldwork may include checking speed of completion, responses in patterns/flat-lining, contradictory answers, quality of open-ended responses etc.
• A computer edit of the data carried out prior to analysis involves both range and inter-field checks. Any further inconsistencies identified at this stage are investigated by reference back to the raw data on the questionnaire.
• Where “other” type questions are used, the responses to these are checked against the parent question for possible up-coding.

A SNAP programme set up with the aim of providing the client with useable and comprehensive data. Crossbreaks are discussed with the client in order to ensure that all information needs are met.