What we’re seeing across the housing sector.

Over the past six months, we’ve worked with more than ten housing providers to assess their readiness for STAIRs (Social Tenant Access to Information Requirements).

As the publication scheme date of October approaches we wanted to share (anonymously) what we’re seeing first-hand across the sector, common themes, emerging challenges, and the practical realities of implementation.

This isn’t theory. It’s what’s happening on the ground.

1. Interpretations and approaches vary -significantly

One of the most striking findings is the sheer breadth of interpretation.

While STAIRs provides a structured framework, how providers are choosing to interpret and implement it varies widely. Some are taking a minimal compliance-led approach, focusing on what must be published. Others are leaning into a transparency-first model, aiming to go beyond the requirements and reshape how they engage with tenants.

There is no single agreed “model” emerging yet, just a spectrum of maturity and ambition.

2. A sector still looking sideways

Many providers are actively looking to peers for direction.

We’re seeing a clear pattern:

• “What are others publishing?”
• “How much detail is too much?”
• “Where are the boundaries (especially around safety and asset data)?”

This has created a natural hesitation across the sector. Organisations don’t want to be the outlier, either by over‑sharing or under‑delivering.

As a result, progress is often cautious and iterative, rather than decisive.

3. The biggest gap isn’t capability, it’s publication

A consistent theme across every assessment is this:

The information usually exists, but isn’t published.

Across governance, policies, performance and tenant engagement, documentation is generally strong, structured, and well-maintained internally.

However, this strength isn’t reflected externally.

The gap is typically in:

• Publication
• Accessibility
• Presentation
• Consistency

This is encouraging, it means STAIRs is less about creating new information, and more about making existing information visible, usable, and trusted.

4. Asset and safety information is the critical pressure point

If there’s one area consistently lagging, it’s housing stock, asset data, and building safety.

Across the board, providers are grappling with:

• How much detail to publish
• How to present safety data meaningfully
• Concerns about sensitivity, misinterpretation, or operational exposure

Yet these are the very areas tenants care most about, fire safety, damp and mould, repairs, and investment plans.

The absence of clear, accessible information here creates a disproportionate impact on tenant trust and regulatory confidence, even where internal processes are robust.

5. Transparency is happening, faster than expected

One unexpected trend is the pace of cultural shift.

Many organisations are moving quickly toward a “transparency-first” mindset, even where their systems and publication models haven’t fully caught up.

In practice, this looks like:

• Early publication of high-level data
• Willingness to refine over time
• Increased internal conversations about openness vs risk

For a sector often seen as cautious, the direction of travel is clear and faster than many anticipated.

6. Accessibility is still underdeveloped

Publishing information is only part of the challenge, making it accessible is another entirely.

We’re seeing varied approaches:

• Some providers publishing openly on public websites
• Others placing information behind tenant portals
• Inconsistent use of formats, navigation, and structure

In several cases, information technically exists online, but is:

• Hard to locate
• Fragmented across multiple pages
• Not presented in a tenant-friendly way

The next phase of maturity will be less about volume and more about usability and clarity.

7. The risk of reactive, not proactive, transparency

Without a clear publication strategy, many providers risk falling into a reactive model, responding to requests rather than enabling self-service.

This creates:

• Increased operational burden
• Inconsistent responses
• Missed opportunities to build trust

By contrast, organisations that establish structured publication schemes and centralised information hubs are already seeing the benefit of reduced internal pressure and improved transparency outcomes.

8. Documentation demand is rising

A final observation, providers are actively seeking structure.

There is growing demand for:

• Template publication schemes
• Standardised document sets
• Practical guidance on “what good looks like”

This reflects a sector that is engaged, but still seeking clarity and consistency.

Key takeaway

The overarching insight is simple:

STAIRs is not a documentation problem, it’s a publication and accessibility challenge.

Most housing providers already have the foundations:

• Strong governance
• Established policies
• Solid performance frameworks

The opportunity now is to translate that internal strength into external transparency.

Final thoughts

We’re at a critical stage in STAIRs adoption.

The sector is:

• Engaged but cautious
• Capable but inconsistent
• Willing but still evolving

Those who move early to define clear, accessible, and structured approaches to transparency will not only meet compliance expectations, but build stronger trust with tenants and regulators alike.

Need support?

If you’re currently working through STAIRs and would find it helpful to see a sample documentation set or publication framework, feel free to get in touch, or view or STAIRS service page.

We’re always happy to share what we’re seeing from across the sector.