Evaluation methods for social housing projects supporting participatory and evidence-based decision-making

Cabrera, Letícia; Hirota, Ercília Hitomi; Codinhoto, Ricardo

doi:10.1590/s1678-86212025000100891

home Sumário navigate_before Anterior Atual Seguinte navigate_next

home Sumário

Artigo • Ambiente Construído 25 • Jan-Dec 2025 • https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-86212025000100891 linkcopy

Evaluation methods for social housing projects supporting participatory and evidence-based decision-making

Métodos de avaliação de projetos de Habitação Social: apoio à tomada de decisão participativa e baseada em evidências

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

Inadequate infrastructure and low-quality public spaces in Social Housing Projects (SHP) negatively affect residents’ well-being, compounded by a lack of participation that prioritizes cost reduction over user needs. Evidence-based design, common in healthcare, can improve SHP quality by integrating evidence into design processes, but its use is limited. This paper presents a study on evaluation methods, highlighting the recommended types of methods for participatory design processes and decision-making involving multidisciplinary stakeholders. A workshop with practitioners and academics examined the design and approval processes of SHPs, revealing issues such as market-driven priorities, unclear regulations, and insufficient collaboration, thus highlighting the need for more transparent and evidence-based approaches. A literature review also identified tools to align design decisions with user needs, but issues such as complexity, lack of knowledge, costs, and cultural barriers hinder their implementation. The research emphasizes the need to adapt these tools to the SHP context, fostering evidence integration and collaboration in housing projects.

Keywords
Social housing; Assessment design tools; Evidence-based design; Decision making

Participant	Role	Sector / Experience / Research
P1	Civil Engineer	Site Layout Plan Directorate
P2	Social worker	Social housing and public policy
P3	Civil Engineer	Roads and infrastructure
P4	Civil Engineer	Transport, mobility and infrastructure planning
P5	Architect and Urban Planner	Urban mobility, urban design, and walkability
P6	Architect and Urban Planner	Urban design, social housing, and public spaces
P7	Architect and Urban Planner	Parametric design and environmental comfort
P8	Architect and Urban Planner	Site Layout Plans Directorate
P9	Architect and Urban Planner	COHAB – Municipal Housing Company, responsible for promoting social housing.
Facilitators
F1	Civil Engineer	Sustainable construction, management design and construction
F2	Architect and Urban Planner	Design Decision Making, Building Information Modelling
F3	Architect and Urban Planner	Walkability, urban planning, and social housing
F4	Architect and Urban Planner	Building Information Modelling

TOOL	AUTHORS	OBJECTIVE	TARGET AUDIENCE
AEDET Design Evaluation Toolkit	NHS, CABE, CIC, Sheffield University	Tool for assessing the quality of healthcare building projects.	Private sector, clients, developers, project teams, project managers
BUS Methodology Building Use Study	BUS	Post-occupancy evaluation	End users (in general), Designers, Occupiers, Managers, Consultants, Researchers
DQI Design Quality Indicators	Construction Industry Council, CABE, OGC, SFfC	System of indicators for assessing project quality at each stage, aiding decision-making, and enabling comparison between options from conception to post-occupation.	Architects, construction users, construction clients, managers, designers, engineers
HQI Housing Quality Index	National Affordable Housing Programme (NAHP). Government United Kingdom	Evaluation and measurement tool for residential developments based on cost and quality.	Private sector, clients, developers, project teams, project managers, non-profit organisations, and researchers
SPeAR Sustainable Project Appraisal Routine	Arup	Software that aids in decision-making for building and infrastructure projects to help achieve sustainability goals.	Designers and consultants
VALiD Value in Design	Universities in the UK	Methodology for integrating stakeholders into the project process and guaranteeing value delivery.	Clients, designers, builders, and other stakeholders
BREEAM Communities	Building Research Establishment (BRE Global)	Tool for assessing, enhancing, and certifying large-scale sustainable development’s social, economic, and environmental aspects to integrate the project into the planning process.	Developers, planners, and professionals involved in masterplans, local authorities, local politicians, the community, and associations
Living Community Challenge	International Living Future Institute	A framework for planning, designing, and construction serves as a tool to create a symbiotic relationship between people and all aspects of the built environment.	Developers, planners, and professionals involved in master planning, research and educational institutions, local authorities, local politicians, the community, and associations
One Planet Communities	BioRegional Development Group - UK	Framework for collaboration with sustainability strategies	Developers, the public, architects, engineers, or community groups
Building for Life	CABE, Design for Homes, Home Builders Federation	Guide to help ensure that needs are met and to help discuss development proposals for local communities.	Local authorities, communities, builders, urban development corporations and other stakeholders
Place Standard Tool	Public Health Scotland; IS. Architecture and Design Scotland; Scottish Government	A tool for assessing the quality of both new and existing sites to identify areas for improvement, engage the community, public, and tertiary sectors in discussions about public projects, and prioritise support for the people’s physical and social health and well-being.	Residents, community groups, local authorities, the public sector, community planning partners, planners, developers, designers
Place Value & the Ladder of Place Quality	Place Alliance, Matthew Carmona, UCL	An audit tool systematically evaluates the quality of the external, residential environment in housing projects.	Planners, developers, architects, or decision-makers.

TOOL	REQUIREMENTS FOR USE	INTERFACE AND PRESENTATION OF RESULTS	DESIGN PROCESS	POSITIVE POINTS	LIMITATIONS
AEDET Design Evaluation Toolkit	User-friendly open tool	Paper or Excel spreadsheet with automated scoring. Intuitive interface. Results in graph form.	It can aid in the design process by improving stakeholder communication and evaluating existing buildings for improvements.	It is an easy-to-use tool with an intuitive interface, evidence-based criterion descriptions, a supported evidence database, shared scoring for multiple users, and an overall score for trade-offs.	No quantitative resources or parameters for comparison
DQI Design Quality Indicators	A DQI-accredited facilitator is required.	The results are presented in radar and doughnut graphs for easy comparison, domain balance, and facilitator feedback.	It can be used throughout the construction life cycle	The DQIfFH replaced the AEDET tool in 2010. It has parameters for scoring, more objective criteria, and criteria relating to the surroundings and buildings.	The results are not easy to visualise or evaluate. The system could have a more automated and user-friendly interface.
HQI Housing Quality Index	No facilitator is needed.	The evaluation is available in MS Excel and paper versions. It displays scores for each criterion but does not allow comparison or visualisation through graphs.	It can be used throughout the construction life cycle	It is an adaptation of the DQI for housing projects, providing guidelines for unit development and objective scoring parameters.	The focus is more on the housing unit. The results are not easily visualised or evaluated. The system could be more automated and user-friendly.
SPeAR Sustainable Project Appraisal Routine	ARUP recommends a facilitator for the evaluation phases, but it is not mandatory.	There is a web version and a desktop version. The results are presented in a radar graph with the score from a traffic light system.	This tool can be used at various stages: to assess and pinpoint gaps, compare pros and cons, and for post-construction and post-occupancy evaluation.	It is an interactive, easy-to-use system that can also be adapted. It uses indicators from other guides and standards as a model.	It could contain a general score to give an overview of the fulfilment of the criteria and the enterprise’s score to facilitate trade-offs.
VALiD Value in Design	Needs an external facilitator	The evaluation interface includes dashboards with criteria, target values, a radar graph, and user and customer questionnaires.	It has a similar structure to CABE and RIBA. Its three stages can be applied throughout the entire design process.	It involves meeting with stakeholders to understand the project’s goals, objectives, and values and obtaining individual assessments from each stakeholder.	There are no pre-defined criteria or parameters for evaluation.
Building for Life	Ventures are not required to hire an external consultant for evaluation, but they can do so.	The results are shown in a radar graph with the score from a traffic light system.	It can be applied at all stages, from initial to discussion.	It includes use cases, questions, principles, and guidelines for application.	It does not have quantitative parameters that allow the objective measurement of locations.
Place Standard Tool	No facilitator is needed; anyone can fill in the forms.	Intuitive and easy-to-use interface available in both paper and online versions. Results are displayed as feedback on evaluation sheets, forming a final radar chart with stakeholders’ scores.	It can be used in the initial phases, during the project process as an action plan to aid community decision-making, and as a tool for monitoring and continuously improving the site.	It has a guide for the designer and the community, as well as materials on how to organise the workshops, and it has a database that supports the evidence; more than one respondent can access it, and the score is given jointly; it has an overall score that helps with trade-offs	It does not have quantitative parameters that allow the objective measurement of locations
Place Value & the Ladder of Place Quality	The British government conducted the audit, but the materials for the evaluation and evidence are available.	The results include scores by category, criterion, and overall score using a value scale, information about the socio-economic profile, and general location observations.	The tool and its criteria can aid project decision-making and evaluate existing and constructed sites.	The assessment is based on case studies and evidence, with a public evidence bank for reference. It considers aspects that add value to the location, provides examples for evaluation, and includes socioeconomic and geographical characteristics of the cases.	The available materials do not fully explain the evaluation process or provide a detailed document outlining the evaluators’ assessment parameters and specific actions.

Problems	Solutions	Design tools
Lack of Consideration of Evidence and Users’ Needs	Use of a tool to mediate discussion, capture, and record user requirements directly through a participatory process or indirectly through evidence from previous research or cadastral analysis.	VALiD - Value in Design, Place Standard Tool, Place Value & the Ladder of Place Quality, Building for Life
Market-Driven Decision-Making and Low Profitability	Consideration of other important stakeholders and decision-making supported by consistent information.	AEDET – Design Evaluation Toolkit, Place Standard Tool, VALiD - Value in Design, SPeAR – Sustainable Project Appraisal Routine, Place Value & the Ladder of Place Quality, BREEAM Communities
Stakeholder Complexity and Collaboration Issues	Use of collaboration and communication tools.	AEDET – Design Evaluation Toolkit, SPeAR – Sustainable Project Appraisal Routine, DQI – Design Quality Indicators, VALiD - Value in Design, BREEAM Communities
Lack of Best Practices and Quality Criteria	Establishment of guidelines and regulations to ensure higher quality.	DQI – Design Quality Indicators, HQI – Housing Quality Index, Place Value & the Ladder of Place Quality, Living Community Challenge, One Planet Communities, Building for Life, Place Standard Tool, SPeAR - Sustainable Project Appraisal Routine, BREEAM Communities
It is an informal, Evidence-lacking, and Non-systematic Design Process.	Use tools that indicate necessary information, the interrelation between requirements, and the impacts of decisions.	AEDET – Design Evaluation Toolkit, Place Standard Tool, Place Value & the Ladder of Place Quality, BREEAM Communities
Need for Culture Change and Tool Implementation	Staff training and the use of tools supported by workshops are also needed.	Place Value & the Ladder of Place Quality, VALiD - Value in Design, Place Standard Tool, BREEAM Communities

vertical_align_top show_chart

more_horiz close
- image
- translate
- link
- article
- vertical_align_top
- file_download
- show_chart
- image
- translate
- link
- article

location_on

Associação Nacional de Tecnologia do Ambiente Construído - ANTAC Av. Osvaldo Aranha, 93, 3º andar, 90035-190 Porto Alegre/RS Brasil, Tel.: (55 51) 3308-4084, Fax: (55 51) 3308-4054 - Porto Alegre - RS - Brazil
E-mail: ambienteconstruido@ufrgs.br

rss_feed Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS