Part one: Meeting the decent homes standard | Archive Titles

Any strategy … as long as it’s one of these
ALMOs
Pros	Cons
retains homes in council ownership	prudential borrowing process for three-star ALMOs yet to be put into action
£2bn to be spent by government on rounds one to four	authority must be a very high performer to qualify
21 councils in rounds one and two progressing well – all first-round ALMOs have received two- or three-star ratings	“only” £700m available for rounds three and four
three-star ALMOs get prudential borrowing powers	likely to be massively oversubscribed
no requirement for a ballot	the government funding is finite – to meet the decent homes standard – and it is unclear what happens to the ALMO once this runs out
5% of bid can be spent on sustainability works for the local environment	rounds one and two showed the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is unlikely to fund all of a prospective ALMO’s bid – in some cases as little as 60% is granted
emphasis is on boosting performance of service delivery	need to have a two-star or higher inspection result once established as an ALMO to receive all the allocated funding
	tenants fear an ALMO is a stepping-stone to transfer
	tight timetable for rounds three and four
	no guarantee of further rounds
Stock transfer
Pros	Cons
allows access to private-sector financing	lengthy, arduous and expensive process
overhanging council debt to the government written off as part of the deal	requires a ballot
still the government’s favoured means of meeting the decent homes target – 200,000 target for transfers each year remains	recent history such as the Birmingham “no” vote often influences tenants against voting for the transfer
Communities Plan allows for government to smooth the process with gap funding to cover low stock valuations	councils unable to campaign for the transfer, and therefore actively refute the claims of anti-transfer campaigners
PFI
Pros	Cons
brings in private-sector cash	only one of the eight pathfinder schemes has been signed after almost four years
retains ultimate council ownership of stock	arduous and complicated process; not tried and tested
demolished homes replaced with new ones that can remain in council ownership, thus allowing councils to build new homes on a limited basis	few private sector players interested in bidding
government-backed by £1.45bn	average bid costs in the region of £1m
£685m extra PFI credits added by Communities Plan	cannot build additional social housing
does not require a ballot	requires a 30-year management contract with a private-sector service provider
	not a whole-stock option – only suitable for pockets of housing that have good potential for value creation so as to generate returns for the private sector firms