Know who is in it
Publish an aggregate profile of the pool every year, using the lenses on this page. A pool that is never described cannot be checked.
Apply a lens
Each dot is one person. A group’s fair share is how many people in the pool it would have if the pool looked like the borough. Hollow orange dots mark a gap for the council to fill through outreach, not a fault of anyone already in the pool. Purple dots mean more than a fair share, which is welcome.
The gaps to fill
The largest shortfalls across every lens, in people, using the illustrative figures above. These would be the outreach priorities, each with a route the council already has.
Keen people are not the problem
Leaseholders turning up in numbers is a sign of a stake in the outcome, and nobody should be turned away for it. The fix is to widen the pool and to be honest about the arithmetic when it comes to decisions.
Avoid
Cap over-represented groups
Turns away the people most willing to give their time and tells them participation is rationed. It shrinks the pool instead of fixing it.
We propose
Fill the hollow dots
Targeted, council-funded outreach to the missing groups until each reaches a minimum, the way citizens’ assemblies recruit a balanced mix of people.
We propose
Weight, don’t exclude
Everyone keeps a voice. When a result is used to make a decision, show it as counted and also adjusted to match the borough’s make-up.
We propose
Report by group
Show how leaseholders, tenants and renters each answered. Where they differ, that difference is the finding, not noise to be averaged away.
Worked example: one vote, two answers
IllustrativeSuppose the pool votes on a proposal. Change the support figures to see how much the raw result depends on who happened to join. Non-resident leaseholders are reported separately and left out of the weighted figure.
Run a pool, not a mailing list
A list of names is not a panel, at 800 or 8,000. If this group is going to carry weight in the strategy, residents need to know how it will be kept representative, active and listened to.
Keep it live
Record when each person last took part, contact lapsed members and say plainly how many are active, so a list of names is not mistaken for a list of voices.
Recruit to the gaps
Set a minimum for every group and fund outreach until each is met. Track how people joined, so we can see which routes actually reach the missing groups.
Ask the right people
Not every question needs the whole pool. Let people opt in by topic and estate, and draw smaller balanced samples for decisions, so nobody is surveyed into silence.
Close the loop
Tell members what they were asked, what they said and what changed as a result. People stay when they can see their time made a difference.
Protect people and the pool
Clear consent, data held under data protection law, no use for council publicity and an easy way to leave. Publish counts, never names.
How we check progress: each year, how many people are in the pool and how many took part, how close each group is to its fair share, and which decisions changed because of what the pool said.
The pool and residents’ associations
RAs and a resident pool can work together towards the same goal: residents shaping decisions about their homes and neighbourhoods. RAs bring a constitution, elected committee members, a defined area and a record that lasts beyond a single consultation. The pool can bring in residents who will never come to a meeting, and ideas nobody has heard yet. Working together, a good idea can be recognised, nurtured and taken seriously wherever it comes from.
The risk
Two channels, no rules
Without a clear process, the pool and RAs could become competing channels, with no way to see how a decision was reached or why one view counted more than another. Influence could route around RAs without anyone deciding that it should, and both would lose trust.
The opportunity
One process, many ways in
A pool survey, an RA meeting or one resident’s suggestion all feed the same open process: logged, weighed against clear criteria and answered with reasons. RAs can take up what pool members raise on their estate and carry it forward, and the pool widens who is heard. Shared, anonymised issue tracking would let an RA see what residents in its area are raising, without anyone having to join.
Connect, by choice
Tell each RA how many pool members live in its area, without naming them. When the pool gives a view about an estate, the RA can add what it knows about the place. Members can opt in to meet their RA, and where there is no RA, members on the same estate could start one, with support from participation officers.
Ask in the open
When the pool is asked about an estate or block, publish the question, so the RA covering it, and any resident, can see what is being asked and respond.
Weigh ideas, not sources
Agree the criteria up front: who is affected, how representative the views are, cost, and what residents in the area think. A good idea gets a fair hearing whether it comes from an RA, a pool member or a single resident.
Explain every decision
Where views differ, publish them alongside the reasons for the decision. An RA can accept being outweighed when the reasons are democratic and visible. What erodes trust is not knowing why.
Still unknown: how many blocks and estates in each ward have an active RA. Once the council publishes which areas each recognised RA covers, RA coverage could be mapped alongside the gaps in the pool. Until then, the RA area lens above shows counts only.
Your record, in your hands
Members of the pool should be able to see and manage their own part in it: what they signed up for, what they have been asked, what they said and what changed. A simple resident portal could do that, with the same options by post and phone for people who do not use the internet.
Manage your engagement
Choose topics, estates and how often you are contacted. See every consultation you were invited to, your responses and the council’s answer. Pause or leave at any time.
See what is held about you
You already have a legal right to see the personal data the council holds on you. A portal could make that routine: a plain view of what is recorded, where it came from and who can see it, without a formal request.
Keep your voice separate from your tenancy
Participation data should not sit inside housing management records. If you choose to link the two, the link is yours to switch off, and what you say in engagement must never be used in decisions about your repairs, charges or tenancy.
What it could look like
Illustrative mockups to start a conversation, not a design the council has agreed. Names, dates and decisions are invented.
My involvement
You are an active member
Topics I want to hear about
✓ Repairs✓ Estate cleaning✓ Major worksYouth✓ Fire safetyGreen spaces
My area
My block and estate only
How to reach me
EmailOn
PostOn
Text messageOff
How oftenAt most monthly
Pause for 3 monthsLeave the pool
What I was asked
Your involvement history
- Sep 2026Estate cleaning standards
You said: bin stores need a weekly clean.
Adopted · new schedule from November - Jun 2026Repairs tracker testing
You tested the tracker by phone.
3 changes made · 1 not taken forward, reasons given - Mar 2026Window replacement, your block
You preferred option A.
Decision due January 2027 · named owner
What the council holds
Your information
- Contact details
- From your sign-up form · seen by the participation team
- Correct
- Equality monitoring (optional)
- Age band, ethnic group, disability · used only in anonymous counts
- Change or remove
- Involvement history
- 7 activities since March 2026
- Download
Link to my housing recordOff
Off unless you switch it on. What you say when taking part is never shared with housing management.
Request everything held about me
By post · large print, easy read or translated on request
Your involvement statement
This year you were asked about 3 things. Here is what happened as a result.
The information we hold about you is listed overleaf.
Change your choices. Tick and return, no stamp needed.
✓Keep me in the pool
Send me less often
Phone me instead of writing
Someone I trust can act for me
Digital exclusion
A portal is one door, not the only door
Many residents in council homes do not use the internet, or not with confidence. A portal must not become a quicker route to influence for people who are already online.
- Every feature has an offline equal. Anything you can do on screen, you can do by post, by phone or in person, with the same response times.
- Help to get online, never pressure. Assisted sessions at libraries, housing offices and RA meetings, for those who want them.
- Trusted helpers. Residents can nominate a family member, carer or RA rep to act for them, with permission they can withdraw.
- Count who takes part and how. Report how many people take part online, by post and by phone. If postal and phone members are heard less, that is a gap to fix.
- Design with the people most likely to be left out. Test with older and disabled residents, people who do not use the internet and people who speak English as an additional language.
A resident proposal for co-design, not an existing council service. Any portal needs a published privacy notice, resident testing before launch and an independent check that participation data is kept apart from housing decisions.
How the numbers work
Fair share is a group’s borough share multiplied by the size of the pool. A group counts as on target within 20% of its fair share either way. Weights are borough share divided by pool share; a weight above 3 means too few voices are carrying a whole group, and more recruitment is the real fix.
Housing tenure is measured against residents only, so non-resident leaseholders are shown but do not change anyone’s fair share. Numbers you enter are saved in this browser only and are never sent anywhere.
Questions for the council
None of this needs personal data. It needs totals, with small numbers hidden the way the council already does in its own equality reports.
Copy the request and send it to your ward councillors or the participation team, or raise it at your next RA or panel meeting.
Request for aggregate information on the resident pool
- How many people the council believes live in its 32,321 homes, and how that figure is worked out.
- How many people in the pool fall into each group on this page: tenure, age band, sex, ethnic group, disability and ward.
- Which blocks and estates each recognised residents’ association covers, how many pool members live in each RA area, and how views from the pool, RAs and individual residents will be weighed, and how decisions will be explained.
- How each person joined the pool (residents’ association, past consultation, housing contact, self-referral, councillor) and when.
- How many people in the pool have taken part in the last 12 months, so a list of names is not mistaken for an active panel.
- One characteristic per table, with any figure under 10 shown as “fewer than 10”, so no individual can be identified.
- How large the council plans the pool to grow, the target make-up it is aiming for, and the outreach budget and channels it will use to close each gap.
- How results will be reported: raw, by group and weighted, published before any vote is held.
- How members will be able to see and manage their own participation record, and how that record is kept separate from housing management decisions.