New homes - enhancing accessibility, adaptability and usability: consultation analysis

1. Introduction

Background

Housing for Varying Needs: a design guide: Part 1 Houses and Flats was produced by Scottish Homes in 1998. It incorporates the ‘barrier free’ concept of accessibility and is a key reference document for the affordable housing sector in Scotland.

The guide, which continues to be well-regarded and is still considered to be a good design benchmark, recognises that people’s housing needs change through their lifetime and that homes should be flexible as a result. Its purpose is ‘…to offer guidance on good practice in the design of all housing, so that newly-built, refurbished or adapted buildings achieve a degree of flexibility, suit people of different abilities, are convenient to use and fit for their purpose’.

Housing for Varying Needs (HfVN) relates to the accessible design of dwellings and their fittings. The guide is complementary to the Building Standards Technical Handbooks, which set minimum requirements for new construction work under The Building (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (as amended). These regulations and supporting standards specifically address the functional performance of buildings and their fabric. The guidance provided in Section 3 ‘Environment’ and Section 4 ‘Safety’ of the Domestic Technical Handbook relating to accessibility is informed by recognised sources of good practice, including the current iteration of Housing for Varying Needs.

To enhance the accessibility, adaptability and usability of homes delivered through the Scottish Government’s Affordable Housing Supply Programme, the then Minister for Housing announced to Parliament in March 2019 that the Housing for Varying Needs design guide would be reviewed.

In March 2021, this commitment was reaffirmed within Housing to 2040 – Scotland’s first long-term national housing strategy. Within the strategy, the Scottish Government also committed to developing and introducing an all-tenure Scottish Accessible Homes Standard, which will be implemented through changes to building standards and guidance from 2025 to 2026.

A public consultation on proposals to enhance the accessibility, adaptability and usability of Scotland’s homes ran between 29 June 2023 and 21 December 2023. The scope of the consultation was twofold.

Firstly, it proposed updates to Part 1 of the Housing for Varying Needs design guide to enhance the accessibility, adaptability and usability of (a) homes delivered through the Affordable Housing Supply Programme and (b) accommodation delivered by local authorities through the Scottish Government’s Gypsy/Traveller Accommodation Fund (or subsequent funding).

Secondly, it introduced principles underpinning the all-tenure Scottish Accessible Homes Standard – as well as setting out proposals for updates to building standards and guidance which would apply to (a) all new build homes and (b) homes delivered through the conversion of non-residential buildings into housing.

Across 52 questions, the consultation aimed to gather views on the proposals.

Respondent profile

In total, 114 consultation responses were received. Two thirds of responses were submitted via the online consultation platform, Citizen Space. The remainder were submitted by email or in hard copy. (As part of the data cleaning process, one additional duplicate response was identified and removed from the analysis.)

Individuals provided 19 responses to the consultation; the remaining 95 were from organisations. Twenty of the 114 responses were campaign responses, submitted by 17 housebuilders/property developers, two architecture organisations and one individual.

While these campaign responses did not answer the closed or open consultation questions directly, the themes in their responses aligned with some themes raised by other respondents. To avoid the thematic analysis being dominated by the views put forward by the campaign, the campaign has been summarised in Chapter 3 – with key themes then noted at appropriate points throughout the report.

To aid analysis, organisations were grouped on the nature of their work. The following table shows the number of organisations by group.

The analysis also included notes from 10 consultation events facilitated by the Scottish Government. The events involved 255 attendees in total, although some individuals attended more than one event. Two were public events advertised on Citizen Space, and seven were closed ‘themed’ events on the following topics: lived experience, health and social care, affordable housing, private housing, Gypsy/Traveller accommodation, island communities, and costings. The final event centred around the Scottish Government’s Accessible Housing and Independent Living Group, which convened a special meeting to discuss the proposals outlined within the consultation paper. More information about the event topics and participants is in Appendix A.

Analysis approach

The Lines Between was commissioned to provide a robust, independent analysis of the responses to the public consultation. The main purpose of consultation analysis is to understand the full range of views expressed and, where possible, using closed questions to quantify how many respondents held particular views. This report provides a thematic analysis of responses based on the analysis approach outlined below.

Public consultations invite everyone to express their views; individuals and organisations interested in the topic are more likely to respond than those without a direct or known interest. Moreover, those who have the capacity to respond are also more likely to take part than those who do not. This analysis is representative of the views expressed by those attending consultation events and respondents to the consultation.

Reflecting the number of respondents and the lengthy submissions provided by a few organisations, it is impossible to detail every response in this report. Full responses to the consultation, where permission for publication was granted, can be found on the Scottish Government’s consultation website. Similarly, the large number of technical proposals outlined in the consultation means it is impractical to fully repeat or explain these in each and every case within this report. Where required, further information on each proposal can be found in the consultation paper and its appendices.

Quantitative analysis

The analysis of responses to each question begins with a summary of the closed question data illustrating what proportion of respondents held a particular view. Data tables showing the full results and response rates for each question are in Appendix B.

To allow comparisons across sub-groups, tables for each question in this report present the percentage response among those who answered each question, broken down by individual and organisation responses and by type of organisation. For clarity the tables include the number of each group answering for each question (Base n=).

Please note that the percentages for each row may not add to 100%, or there may be slight differences when adding row percentages, due to rounding.

Qualitative analysis

Qualitative analysis identifies the key themes across responses to each question. The research team developed a draft coding framework based on a review of the consultation questions and a sample of responses. During the coding process, new codes were created if additional themes emerged.

In a small number of instances where alternative format responses contained information that did not align with specific questions, analysts exercised judgment about the most relevant place to include this material for analysis purposes.

Notes from the consultation events were reviewed to identify any differences in opinion compared to the main sample and to identify any new themes. The themes evident in the events typically aligned with those evident in the main sample, but any additional or unique perspectives are noted in this report.

Where appropriate, quotes from a range of participants are included to illustrate key points and provide useful examples, insights and contextual information. Some quotes however include information that is based on the respondent’s perceptions or assumptions and may not always be accurate or supported by evidence. In addition, a few quotes have been lightly edited for readability but this has not affected the meaning of the quotes.

On average, half of respondents commented on each open question, with others providing a qualitative overview in their alternative format responses. When reviewing the qualitative analysis in this report, we would ask the reader to consider:

• where possible to do so, we make it clear where qualitative themes align with the closed question results. However, depending on the views of those who left a comment the most prevalent qualitative theme may be in opposition to a proposal which otherwise records support in the closed question, or vice versa
• where differences between the views of individuals and organisations, or between different types of organisation, were evident in qualitative responses, these have been noted. If no specific differences are highlighted, then a theme was raised by a mix of respondents
• some respondents left the same or similar comment or repeatedly raised the same issues or suggestions at multiple questions, regardless of the specific focus of the question. These views are all included in this report but at the most relevant place to do so to avoid repetition
• in a few instances qualitative comments from respondents do not align with their response to the quantitative questions. For example, a respondent may agree in principle but use their open comment to caveat their agreement or suggest an alternative approach

Weight of opinion

This report presents the themes identified in responses from most to least commonly mentioned. All themes, including views shared by small numbers of respondents, are covered; an insightful view expressed by a very small number of participants is not given less weight than more general comments shared by a majority. Similarly, all responses have an equal weighting. We recognise this means a response from an individual has the same weight as the response from an organisation which may represent many members, but this approach ensures all views are presented.

Qualitative analysis of open questions does not permit the quantification of results. However, to assist the reader in interpreting the findings, a framework is used to convey the most to least commonly identified themes in responses to each question:

• the most common theme: most frequently identified
• the second most common theme
• ‘many respondents’ or ‘a prevalent theme’: raised by 20 or more respondents
• ‘several respondents’ or ‘a recurring theme’: mentioned by 13 to 19 respondents
• ‘some respondents’ or ‘another theme’: between five and 12 respondents
• ‘a few’, ‘a small number’ or ‘a less commonly mentioned theme’: raised by fewer than five respondents
• ‘two/one respondents’: a singular comment or a view identified in two responses

Report structure

The remainder of the report is set out as follows:

• chapter 2 summarises the overarching quantitative and qualitative themes across the consultation
• chapter 3 contains an overview of the campaign responses
• chapters 4 to 18 provide a question-by-question analysis of responses to questions about Part 1 of the Housing for Varying Needs design guide
• chapter 19 presents analysis of responses to questions about the Scottish Accessible Homes Standard
• chapter 20 outlines responses to questions to inform impact assessments
• chapter 21 sets out conclusions
• appendix A presents details of the consultation events and further quantitative data is in Appendix B