Case studies of key actions
Here you will find various bodies of work that the Customer Involvement Panel (CIP) has played a significant part in developing. These case studies demonstrate how we ensure the customer’s voice is heard and considered.
2025
What CIP did: Reviewed how empty homes are prepared for new tenants.
Why: To ensure standards are met and delays are reduced.
Action taken: Discussed recharges, cleanliness, and repair quality.
Impact: Highlighted key areas for improvement to speed up and improve the process.
What CIP did: Talked about recent incidents affecting staff and discussed safety.
Why: To help protect staff and improve services.
Action taken: Shared examples and looked at possible tools like body cams.
Impact: Raised awareness of staff safety and supported better training and communication.
What CIP did: Regularly reviewed how complaints are handled.
Why: To make sure the process is clear, fair, and effective.
Action taken: Worked with the complaints team on service improvements and looked at how quickly issues are acknowledged.
Impact: Helped strengthen the complaints process and improve customer confidence.
What CIP did: CIP partnered with St Mary’s University and the University of Wolverhampton to support a research project focused on persistent damp and mould issues.
Why: To better understand tenant experiences, identify underlying causes (e.g. poor ventilation), and co-produce solutions that reflect the tenant voice.
Action taken: CIP members agreed to participate in online focus groups. A draft scope was developed, and residents were engaged to share insights. CIP members volunteered to support the sessions.
Impact: Strengthened the evidence base for tackling damp and mould, ensuring tenant experiences shape future interventions and policy development.
What CIP did: Conducted a structured scrutiny task reviewing Stage 1 complaint responses.
Why: To assess the tone, clarity, and empathy in complaint handling and identify areas for improvement.
Action taken: Reviewed real complaint cases, provided feedback on missed opportunities, repetitive language, and lack of context. Requested confirmation that complainants are contacted before Stage 1 responses are issued.
Impact: Led to improvements in complaint handling, including better proofreading, clearer communication, and more empathetic responses. Reinforced the importance of customer context in resolution.
What CIP did: Joined a subgroup to co-create the revised Customer Engagement Strategy.
Why: To ensure the strategy reflects customer needs and promotes meaningful involvement.
Action taken: Volunteers from CIP joined the subgroup. Feedback was provided on the draft CIP and Resident Engagement Officer webpages and survey circulation.
Impact: Enabled customer-led development of engagement tools and strategies, improving transparency and accessibility.
What CIP did: Reviewed and shaped ideas for customer educational workshops.
Why: To empower tenants with knowledge on repairs, financial support, ASB, and digital tools.
Action taken: Provided feedback on proposed themes including repairs handbook walkthroughs, budgeting sessions, and ASB reporting. Suggested form-filling support and collaboration with external partners.
Impact: Initiated development of practical, customer-focused workshops that will improve service understanding and tenant confidence.
What CIP did: Helped design a new Mystery Shopper Programme to evaluate service delivery.
Why: To gain insights into customer journeys and identify areas for service improvement.
Action taken: Reviewed programme scope, suggested service areas to include, and proposed names like “Check-in Champions” and “Tenant Talks.” Agreed to quarterly cycles and structured feedback.
Impact: Laid the foundation for a robust customer-led evaluation tool that will inform service enhancements and ensure accountability.
What CIP did: Reviewed feedback from previous scrutiny of Stage 1 complaints and supported development of a complaints explainer video.
Why: To improve communication, manage expectations, and ensure tenants understand how to raise complaints effectively.
Action taken: CIP feedback led to service improvements and plans to share before-and-after examples. Automated acknowledgements were confirmed, and best practices are being explored.
Impact: Enhanced complaint handling transparency and tenant confidence in the resolution process.
What CIP did: Discussed the new Decent Homes Standard and challenges in accessing properties for surveys.
Why: To ensure homes are safe and compliant, and that tenants are supported in understanding heating, ventilation, and survey processes.
Action taken: CIP recommended evening/weekend appointments, clearer communication, and tenant education. WH committed to improving access and staff training under Awaab’s Law.
Impact: Improved survey planning and tenant engagement, with a focus on health, safety, and reducing repeat issues.
What CIP did: Reviewed and revised the Stock Condition Survey letter to improve clarity and tenant understanding.
Why: To ensure tenants are well-informed and prepared for survey visits, reducing missed appointments and confusion.
Action taken: Suggested changes to wording, tone, and structure. Recommended adding guidance on access, communication expectations, and rescheduling.
Impact: Improved tenant communications and accessibility, supporting better survey outcomes and data quality.
What CIP did: Participated in role play exercises to explore tenant and staff perspectives on communication.
Why: To identify barriers to effective communication and promote empathy and consistency in service delivery.
Action taken: Recommended follow-up emails after calls, a flagging system for tenants with specific needs, and continued staff training.
Impact: Strengthened communication standards and inclusivity, ensuring services are responsive to diverse tenant needs.
2024
What CIP did: Reviewed and discussed fire safety measures and the Resident Engagement Strategy.
Why: To help keep tenants safe and ensure fire regulations are followed.
Action taken: Watched a fire safety video, discussed fire drills, and planned more work on the Resident Engagement Strategy.
Impact: Raised awareness and preparedness among tenants and supported the development of a stronger engagement strategy.
What CIP did: Reviewed Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) reports and secure tenancy agreements.
Why: To help address ASB issues and make sure tenants understand their rights and responsibilities.
Action taken: Shared reports, held discussions, and planned to draft a report with recommendations.
Impact: Improved understanding and management of ASB, leading to better relationships in communities.
What CIP did: Discussed the need for more members and new recruitment ideas.
Why: To build a panel that better reflects the diversity of customers.
Action taken: Planned open days and a social media campaign with support from the comms team.
Impact: Strengthened recruitment efforts and encouraged wider involvement.
What CIP did: Reviewed boiler servicing and provided feedback on a new gas safety video.
Why: Tenants had concerns about what checks were being done and what to expect.
Action taken: Requested a clearer video showing the full gas safety check process — now live.
Impact: Improved understanding and safety through a more informative, accessible video.
What CIP did: Suggested renaming the 'Good Neighbour Charter' and reviewed the policy.
Why: Felt the title did not reflect the purpose and wanted to improve how noise issues are handled.
Action taken: Proposed a name change, reviewed examples, and asked for more data.
Impact: Started a review process that may lead to clearer policies and better neighbour relations.
What CIP did: Reviewed family homelessness and placements outside the borough.
Why: Concerned about the effects on schooling and mental health.
Action taken: Discussed improved results, including fewer families placed outside the city.
Impact: Helped highlight the importance of local placements and supported ongoing improvements.
What CIP did: Visited the Tarmac Road office to learn more about repairs.
Why: To better understand the process and identify issues.
Action taken: Followed up with the team and discussed service improvements.
Impact: Identified gaps and started conversations to make repairs more efficient.
What CIP did: Reviewed the draft policy.
Why: To check it is fair and effective for both staff and customers.
Action taken: Gave feedback and added it to the future agenda.
Impact: Ensured customer voices helped shape how complaints are handled.
What CIP did: Reflected on the year’s work and reviewed training from TPAS.
Why: To recognise progress and make sure members are confident in their role.
Action taken: Shared reflections and discussed future priorities.
Impact: Highlighted success stories and raised awareness nationally, including in the Ombudsman’s report.
What CIP did: Continued reviewing Tenant Satisfaction Measure data and survey feedback.
Why: To understand how well Wolverhampton Homes is performing.
Action taken: Looked at how data is collected and what customers are saying.
Impact: Improved awareness of satisfaction levels and helped shape focus areas.
What CIP did: Tested the app and website and gave feedback.
Why: To make sure the digital services meet tenant needs.
Action taken: Suggested more repair categories and easier access to tenancy documents.
Impact: Helped improve usability and ensured the platforms reflect real customer needs.