Agenda item

A paper was considered which provided the Board with the latest performance information on Housing and Infrastructure programmes being delivered on behalf of the MCA.

Members were informed that the SYMCA had 40 live capital projects which fell within the remit of the Housing and Infrastructure Board.  The projects were funded by four funding streams:

·            Brownfield Housing Fund (BHF)

·            Getting Britain Building Fund (GBF)

·            Gainshare Funding

·            Legacy Local Growth Fund (LGF)

The report gave an overview of the performance of programmes and the projects within them and highlighting management actions being taken to mitigate risks.

Members were informed that the expenditure baseline for 21/22 had been initially set at £69.89m with the latest forecasts suggesting outturn expenditure of £23.58m.  This level of expenditure would generate a material underspend of £46.31m (65%).

Of this value, £24.15m (52%) related to gainshare funded activity that could be reprofiled without recourse to government.  The balance of underspend - £22.16m (48%) – is funded from conditional grant from government, and consents would likely be required to roll-forward the funding to future periods.

A graph at section 2.1 of the report highlighted the forecast full-year expenditure profiles set against the baseline targets. 

The GBF and Brownfield baseline target were set by government and required in-year allocations to be fully defrayed within the financial year.

Since the beginning of the year, concerns had growing over the pace of some areas of expenditure. 

These issues had previously been reported to the Board and were systemic across partners, largely reflecting pressures arising from the volume of activity and supply chain constraints coalescing around extremely tight deadlines prescribed by government. 

Despite those issues, good progress was being made to ensure that the full allocation of GBF funding was defrayed and projects delivered by March 2022. 

A graph at section 2.4 of the report showed the milestone status of the projects. 

Members noted that, ideally at this stage of the year, the weight of projects would be in FBC processes, or in contract negotiation or delivery.

The graphic indicated a healthy pipeline of projects in progression, but the weight of projects at this early stage development highlighted the increasing likelihood that in-year expenditure targets would be missed.

The pace of delivery was being affected by a number of issues including supply chain pressures which were creating cost inflation and time delays.  This issue was exacerbating known risks around internal capacity and the complex nature of delivering viable schemes in challenging Brownfield locations.

The main concern in the short-term was the BHF fund programme where government had set a £20m spend target for 2021/22.  The programme had schemes at various stages of development with one in delivery.  The current projected contracted value was currently £15.18m. 

A graphic at section 2.7 of the report highlighted the milestone status of the Brownfield programme by value, which highlighted the challenge of getting schemes through assurance, contracting, and into delivery by the end of the year. 

Members noted that there were currently six schemes that had reached full approval and a further nine in development.  The schemes were experiencing barriers to progressing at pace, including lack of cost certainty, detailed design and internal approvals, procurement, and match funding not yet being secured.

Work was ongoing to accelerate Brownfield schemes through the process where possible and mitigate key risks through contract conditions.

RESOLVED – That the Board considered the performance information provided to identify future performance deep-dives or significant areas of risk.