Decision details

The Warm Homes: Social Housing Fund (WH:SHF), previously known as the Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund (SHDF), is a grant fund administered by the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) that aims to support Registered Providers of social housing with making improvements to the energy performance of their housing stock.

For this next and newest phase it is proposed that Brent join a consortium of 27 London Boroughs and housing associations to submit a strategic partnership bid for this fund on a London-wide basis. The overarching pan-London bid is being coordinated by Retrofit London, a team within London Councils, alongside the Greater London Authority (GLA).  This decision therefore seeks approval to submit their signed declaration to London Councils ahead of the bid being submitted to DESNZ.

That the Corporate Director, Partnerships, Housing and Resident Services, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Employment, Innovation and Climate Action:

(1)        Approve the submission of an application for grant funding as part of a Pan-London consortium bid, coordinated by London Councils, to the Warm Homes: Social Housing Fund in the sum of £1.23M.

(2)        Note that to qualify for grant funding set out in (1) above, the Council is required to co-fund the sum of £2.46m to deliver the energy efficiency works.

(3)        Note that the Corporate Director, Finance and Resources, as required as part of the Consortia Member Declaration, also approve the submission of the application for grant funding as set out in (1) above.

The objective of this bid is ultimately to improve energy efficiency and reduce carbon emissions in 80 of the worst performing properties in the council housing stock from an energy efficiency perspective.  This initiative would represent the second substantial retrofit programme undertaken by Brent, furthering the Council's commitment to decarbonisation.

The project contributes to advancing the borough's climate action goals and reflects an increased ambition to improve energy efficiency across the council’s housing stock.

Officers have recently undertaken an exercise to consider the different options for usage of the council’s carbon Offset Fund, following Cabinet’s decision to amend how its use is governed in October 2024. This included identifying alternative street properties, instead of Pharamond and the Oaks, which have a poor energy efficiency rating within the council’s own stock. Two scenarios identified 82 alternative properties for either ‘‘light’ or ‘‘deep’ retrofit work. The financial implications of the two scenarios ranged between £600k and £4m, and further complicated feasibility work would be required to understand if this would result in increased carbon saving than through retrofitting the Oaks and Pharamond. It was also considered that this alternative option would carry greater risk in delivery due to the complexities of working on separate street properties compared with working on two single communal blocks.

There remains an option to withdraw from the consortium at this stage due to concerns raised around the financial affordability for the Housing Revenue Account.  If the Carbon offset fund cannot be utilised to fund Brent’s contribution to the scheme, there would be limited availability of resources within the HRA to cover the additional capital costs for these works. There is also no guarantee that another phase of this scheme will be run again during the current parliament. There is a potential reputational risk of not meeting the council’s pledge to do all reasonable in its gift to achieve carbon neutrality by 2030. On balance, it is considered that council should go forward as part of the bid consortium at this stage, but that the member consortia declaration will be amended to reflect that the final decision on entering into a grant agreement (step-down agreement) with the pan-London consortium (should the consortium be successful in due course) would be subject to the council’s governance process for agreeing key decisions. It is anticipated that further work can be undertaken to ensure that this scheme is considered best value for money when considered against potential alternatives.

None