How our tenants think we're doing
Find out about Tenant Satisfaction Measures (TSMs) that tell us how residents whose homes or buildings we manage rate our performance and how well we are doing based on yearly survey results.
Tenant satisfaction measures
Tenant satisfaction measures (TSMs) help show how well social housing landlords are doing at providing good quality homes and services. They help tenants hold their landlords to account and we must show the results of our surveys.
There are two types of TSMs.
Tenant perception measures (TPMs)
Tenant perception measures survey 2024/25
The 2024/2025 survey was the latest in a yearly survey we carry out as part of regulations. The survey took place between August and November 2024.
| What we asked our tenants about | Percentage of satisfied responses from our tenants in 2024/25 | Percentage of satisfied responses from our tenants in 2023/24 | London median (middle of all London results) 2023/24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall satisfaction (TP01) | 66.5% | 64.3% | 60.3% |
| Repairs (TP02) | 69.9% | 65.7% |
63.5% |
| Time taken to complete most recent repair (TP03) | 68.1% | 63.5% | 61.7% |
| Home is well maintained (TP04) | 68.3% | 66% | 60.9% |
| Home is safe (TP05) | 71.3% | 69.4% | 66.8% |
| Landlord listens to views and acts upon them (TP06) | 59.3% | 56.7% | 51.4% |
| Landlord keeps tenants informed about things that matter (TP07) | 72.5% | 71.7% | 66.7% |
| Agreement that landlord treats tenants fairly and with respect (TP08) | 74.8% | 75.5% | 70.1% |
| Landlord's approach to complaints (TP09) | 25.3% | 25.6% | 26% |
| Landlord keeps communal areas clean and well-maintained (TP10) | 67.3% | 64.3% | 62.4% |
| Landlord makes a positive contribution to neighbourhood (TP11) | 70.8% | 69.9% | 62.5% |
| Landlord's approach to handling anti-social behaviour (TP12) | 60.6% | 59.5% | 58.3% |
How we collect and report results of the tenant perceptions survey 2024/25
Islington Council has 25,184 low-cost rental accommodation (LCRA) households. We have to to collect a minimum of 2,235 responses each year to provide data with high accuracy and confidence in results. At the end of the survey, we had completed 2,513 interviews. This is more than the minimum requirement set by the Regulator.
We conducted a survey over a four-month period from August to November 2024. The survey was by phone as this is a cost effective and efficient way of contacting households. It also made it easy to track how representative the sample size was of our residents.
We contracted Kwest to make the calls, with up to five attempts to get a survey response with each low-cost rental accommodation (LCRA) household.
To find out more about how we gathered the data for the survey, read the Tenant Perception Measure Methodology 2024/25 and Tenant Perception Questionnaire 2024/25. You can find earlier methodologies and questionnaires under 'useful documents' on this page.
Management information measures
There are ten management information measures (MIs) across four areas. They are collected in landlord and management data.
Management information measures report 2024/25
This report covers the 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025.
| Description of standard | Percentage or number for 2024/25 | Percentage or number for 2023/24 | London median (middle of all London results) 2023/24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| BS01: Proportion of homes where all required gas safety checks were completed | 99.6% | 99.7% | 99.7% |
| BS02: Proportion of homes where all required fire safety checks were completed | 99.9% | 98.8% | 99.7% |
| BS03: Proportion of homes where all required asbestos management surveys or reinspections were completed | 88.6% | 99.7% | 100% |
| BS04: Proportion of homes where all required legionella (bacteria carried in water) risk assessments were completed | 99.9% | 100% | 99.6% |
| BS05: Proportion of homes where all required passenger lift safety checks were completed | 100% | 82.6% | 98.5% |
| NM01 (1): Anti-social behaviour cases opened (per 1,000 properties) | 36.8 | 12.3 | 32.1 |
| NM01 (2): Anti-social behaviour cases that involve hate incidents opened (per 1,000 properties) |
0.2 | 0.2 |
0.5 |
| RP01: Proportion of homes that do not meet the Decent Homes Standard | 4% | 3.2% | 8.8% |
| RP02 (1): Proportion of non-emergency repairs we respond to completed within our target timescale | 76.4% | 70.6% | 78.7% |
| RP02 (2): Proportion of emergency repairs completed within our target timescale | 94.7% | 92.1% | 92.1% |
| CH01 (1): Number of Stage 1 complaints received (per 1,000 homes) | 68.1 | 70.5 | 70.5 |
| CH01 (2): Number of Stage 2 complaints relative to the size of the landlord (per 1,000 homes) | 16.9 | 19.1 | 11.8 |
| CH02 (1): Proportion of Stage 1 complaints responded to within the Housing Ombudsman's Complaint Handling Code timescales (see note below) | 62.4% | 74.8% | 74.8% |
| CH02 (2): Proportion of Stage 2 complaints responded to within the Housing Ombudsman's Complaint Handling Code timescales | 98.4% | 96.7% | 70.8% |
For CH02 (1), we have not been able to fully meet the Regulators’ technical requirements for calculating this number because of an issue with our systems. We are fixing this for 2025/26. Instead, we have calculated as close as possible to the requirement to give the most accurate position we can.
Notes about the management information measures report for 2024/25
- RP01: Find out more about the Decent Homes Standard.
- RP02 (1) non-emergency repair maximum target timescale is 20 days.
- Other non-emergency repair timescales include 60 days for legal disrepair, insurance, forced entry appointments for gas servicing, and five days for a repair recall.
- RP02 (2) Emergency repair maximum target timescale is 24 hours.
- Other emergency repair timescales include two hours for a repair that poses an immediate threat to health or safety.
How we collect and report on our Tenant Satisfaction Measures
Since the introduction of Tenant Satisfaction Measures, we’ve put clear procedures in place to make sure we are giving accurate data to the Regulator of Social Housing.
We’ve worked closely with our service leads to improve data collection for consistent internal reporting and benchmarking (comparing our performance against other local authorities to see how we are doing and find areas to improve), including quarterly updates presented at scrutiny meetings.
