Greater ManchesterHHousing RetrofituBusiness ... - CLASP
Transcript of Greater ManchesterHHousing RetrofituBusiness ... - CLASP
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business
February 2012
Report: Stage 1 (Options Definition Support) and Stage 2 (Options Appraisal Support) DRAFT
Low Carbon Housing RetrofitGreater Manchester
Ref: 11250255
Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support1 (Options Definition Support) and Stage 2
Low Carbon Housing Retrofit
Private and confidentialMichael O’DohertyHead of Climate Change: Buildings and Energy,Environmental Strategy ServiceManchester City CouncilTown Hall Manchester M60 2LA
Dear Michael
Report: Stage 1 (Options Definition Support) and Stage 2 (OptionsAppraisal Support)In accordance with our engagement letter dated 12 January 2012, we have
Ref: 11250255
In accordance with our engagement letter dated 12 January 2012, we haveprepared this summary report to support the delivery of the Greater ManchesterHousing Retrofit Business Case.
Purpose of our report and restrictions on its useThis report was prepared on your specific instructions to assist in the developmentof a Business Case for the role of the public sector to maximise housing retrofitopportunities in Greater Manchester via the Green Deal. In carrying out our workand preparing this summary report, we have worked solely on your instructions.
Our report may not have considered issues relevant to any third parties. Any usesuch third parties may choose to make of our report is entirely at their own risk andwe shall have no responsibility whatsoever in relation to any such use. This reportshould not be provided to any third parties without our prior approval and withoutthem recognising in writing that we assume no responsibility or liability whatsoeverto them in respect of the contents of our deliverables.
Heat networks initiatives in Greater Manchester
Ernst & Young LLP1 More London PlaceLondon SE1 2AF
Tel: 020 7951 2000Fax: 020 7951 1345www.ey.com/uk
[X] February 2012
This information is supplied on the condition that Ernst & Young, and any partner oremployee of Ernst & Young, are not liable for any error or inaccuracy containedherein, whether negligently caused or otherwise, or for loss or damage suffered byany person due to such error, omission or inaccuracy as a result of such supply.
1
Yours sincerely
James Close
PartnerErnst & Young LLP
Heat networks initiatives in Greater Manchester
Section 1 Project overviewSection 2 Overview: Stage 1 and Stage 2 Section 3 Stage 1: Core models selectedSection 4 Stage 2: Options appraisalSection 5 Next steps
AppendicesAppendix A Two rejected models
Contents
Ref: 11250255
Appendix B Green Deal Finance Company BackgroundAppendix C Core Model Selection workshop 18 January 2012 – Slide PackAppendix D Core Model Selection workshop 18 January 2012 – Attendees
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Page38102437
4148
Slide Pack 50Attendees [XX]
2Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Section 1
Project overview
Ref: 11250255
Project overview
Project Aim: Business Case for the role of the public sector in maximise housing retrofit opportunities in Greater Manchester via the Green DealAims► To support the delivery of the Low Carbon Retrofit Strategy,
which aims to:► Achieve the national carbon reduction commitments under the
Climate Change Act 2008► Contribute to Greater Manchester’s commitment to 48%
reduction in carbon output by 2020► Obtain ‘First Mover’ economic advantages in the retrofit market► Improve neighbourhoods and tackle fuel poverty► Stimulate take up of Green Deal and maximise subsidies e.g.,
FIT, RHI, ECO
Ref: 11250255
FIT, RHI, ECO
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Business Case for the role of the public sector in housing retrofit opportunities in Greater Manchester via the
Scope of work1. Stage 1: Option Definition support, where a shortlist of options is
created, and the high level financial and delivery implications considered
2. Stage 2: Options Appraisal support, where the shortlist of options is subject to a high level evaluation in order to select two preferred options to take forward into a Business Case
3. Stage 3: Initial Business Case development support, where the two preferred options are subject to further financial and investment analysis in order to select a single preferred option to be taken forward into the Final Business Case
4. Stage 4: Final Business Case development support, where the
4Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
4. Stage 4: Final Business Case development support, where the preferred option is further developed and presented for formal approval by AGMA prior to the commencement the procurement (if applicable) and implementation phases
The methodology enables broad engagement and a detailed review and decision making process
Deselection of least
favourable model
10 AGMA bodies plus
social housing
providers
Multiple models down to
three
Ref: 11250255 Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Initial Business Case development – two most favourable models
model
Final Business Case development –final favoured model
The methodology enables broad engagement and a detailed review
The challenge is to achieve engagement across a range of functions in 10 Local Authorities and multiple RSLs while delivering a highly focused action-orientated business cases for the agreed models.Process is in three phases:► Narrow down options (Stage 1 and Stage 2)► Align Local Authorities with preferred model based on required
outputs and agreed inputs (Stage 3)► Support delivery of Greater Manchester business case for
preferred option (Stage 4)
5Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Stage breakdown – there are four stages and the project is at the end of the second stage
: Option Definition support
► Develop the key high level options for appraisal
► Agree core models for Stage 2
► Develop up to two preferred options to support your selection of a single preferred option
► Consider financial and
► Develop an options appraisal evaluation framework and methodology
► Facilitate options appraisal
Options Appraisal support
Ref: 11250255
► Consider financial and investment options via modelling
► Consider AGMA data:
portfolio, profiled by year 1 to 5-programme, including measures, costs, efficiency savings, and FIT/RHI income (if applicable)
► High level ‘critical friend’ review of AGMA data
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
► Facilitate options appraisal workshop
► Agree two core models for Stage 3
there are four stages and the project is at the end
Initial Business Case development support
Final Business Case development support
Develop up to two preferred options to support your selection of a single preferred option Consider financial and
► Further iteration of the financial and investment model
► Develop role of the public sector in the projectConsider financial and
investment options via modellingConsider AGMA data:- baseline property portfolio, profiled by year 1 to 5- baseline retrofit programme, including measures, costs, efficiency savings, and FIT/RHI income (if applicable)High level ‘critical friend’ review of AGMA data
sector in the project► Consider financing options
for financing► Evaluation of minimum
AGMA investment required► Risk Management
workshop► Estimation of cost to set up
the preferred model and assess options to recover costs
► Support development of action plan to deliver procurement phase and/or implementation phase
6Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
This report is intended for use by Greater Manchester officers in sustainability/energy efficiency related divisions► The aim of this document is to brief the audience on the
process by which two core models were selected for the chosen purpose of Stage 3: Initial Business Case development support. The final selection was made by delegates from the AGMA Local Authorities, supplemented by local RSLs and other relevant public sector bodies who attended the Core Model Selection workshop on 18 January 2012.
► This report documents Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the work commissioned by the AGMA and as such, this report should be viewed as an interim document as part of this work. Further deliverables are as follows:
Ref: 11250255
► Stage 3: Financial and investment model for each option, to be used by AGMA to inform the selection of a single preferred option to be fully developed in the Final Business Case
► Stage 4: Financial and Investment Sections of the Final Business Case
► Stage 4: Financial and Investment Model for the preferred option
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
This report is intended for use by Greater Manchester officers in sustainability/energy efficiency related divisions
7Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Section 2
Overview: Stage 1 and Stage 2
Ref: 11250255
Overview: Stage 1 and Stage 2Overview: Stage 1 and Stage 2Overview: Stage 1 and Stage 2
The Stage1 and Stage 2 process builds on the EST review of models with further research and a workshop to agree which models to take forward► At Stage 1 a number of potential implementation models were
reviewed based on the Energy Saving Trust report ‘Local Authority Large Scale Retrofit – A Review of Finance Models’.
► Through discussions with the AGMA project team, a number of models were discounted. The rationale for the rejection of these models is provided on slide 10, and Appendix A describes the models that were rejected at Stage 1 in more detail.
► As a result, three models that would be able to deliver large scale programmes across a range of desired outcomes were taken forwards for appraisal at the Core Model Selection workshop held on 18 January 2012. These models are described in more detail in Section 3.
Ref: 11250255
in Section 3.► The aim of the Core Model Selection workshop was to deselect
the least favourable of the three models, with the remaining two models to be taken forward to Stage 3 (Initial Business Case development).
► Marksman Consulting and Ernst & Young carried out additional research to validate the models.
► A workshop (Core Model Selection workshop) was held on 18 January 2012 at which the AGMA Local Authorities were represented. This had the following aims:► To select two local authority housing retrofit models to take
forward to initial business case development► To drive the options appraisal of Housing Retrofit models
leading to business case for a preferred model► To inform and obtain buy-in from stakeholders
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
The Stage1 and Stage 2 process builds on the EST review of models with further research and a workshop to agree which models to take
Conclusions► Two core models have been selected and the Initial Business
Case for these will be developed during Stage 3 of this project. The two models are as follows:► AGMA as marketer/facilitator for a panel of Green Deal
providers► AGMA as a large scale Green Deal provider
► The following slides provide more detail on the two selected models and the deselected model (being ‘Local Authority as general promoter of Green Deal market’)
► The next phase (Stage 3) will help AGMA to identify its preferred ► The next phase (Stage 3) will help AGMA to identify its preferred Model to be fully developed in the Final Business Case
9Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Section 3
Stage 1: Core Models selected
Ref: 11250255
Stage 1: Core Models selectedStage 1: Core Models selectedStage 1: Core Models selected
Spectrum of possible models – by ambition to deal with carbon and desire to work with the private sector
High
LA as Green Deal Provider
LA as marketer/facilitator
£ Public/Private£ Public
Ambition to dealwith carbon
Ref: 11250255
Low
Low High
Retrofit Guarantee Fund
EST model
LA small scale Green Deal Provider LA General Promoter
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Outsourced (“Rent a roof”)
Additional modelKey:
Market Led/Market Dependent (Do Nothing)
by ambition to deal with carbon and desire to work with the private sector
► The Energy Saving Trust (EST) identified five models for delivery of the Green Deal based on a local authority’s ambition to deal with carbon and its desire to work with the private sector
► These are detailed in a report commissioned by DECC (Local authority large scale retrofit: A review of finance models 1) and involved the EST working with Anthony Collins Solicitors LLP who conducted the due diligence for Birmingham Energy Savers phase III.
► One of the EST models, the Outsourced (“Rent a roof”) model, was rejected on the basis that the model focuses on the micro-generation of electricity, and as such is not directly applicable to the aims and objectives of the project.
► In addition to the models identified by EST we have also identified two further models –LA as General Promoter and LA as small scale Green Deal Provider).
► The diagram to the left shows the spectrum of core models selected.
1 Report available at the following address:
http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/england/Publications2/Local-authorities-and-housing-associations/Funding-and-finance/Local-authority-large-scale-retrofit-A-review-of-finance-models
Desire to work with private sector
11Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Outsourced (“Rent a roof”)
Market Led/Market Dependent (Do Nothing)
The sources of finance and the effort that a local authority now wishes to put into a programme are also important:
Local authority models – effort and sources of finance
Financedby LA
Small ScaleProvider
Source of finance
Ref: 11250255
General promotion to market
Third partyfinance
(e.g., TGDFCo)
MediumLow
Retrofit Guarantee Fund
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Market Led/Market Dependent (Do
Nothing)
The sources of finance and the effort that a local authority now wishes to put into a programme are also important:
effort and sources of finance
Green Deal Provider (PWLB)
Marketing development Co
Medium High
Green Deal Provider
Panel of Green Deal Providers
Effort
12Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
This creates six potential roles for LAs based on appetite for input and output requirements
Outputs/Outcomes *
LA as marketer/ facilitator
LA as large scale GDP
Ref: 11250255
Four models took low input/output positions and the other two which require more input are designed to deliver larger outcomes.
Inputs (Resource/Risk) *LA as small scale GDP Retrofit
Guarantee Fund
General promotion
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
facilitator
Do Nothing
roles for LAs based on appetite for input and
LA as large scale GDP
* Examples of Inputs and Outputs/Outcomes are
considered on slides 25 and 26
low input/output positions and the other two which require more input are designed to deliver larger outcomes.
Inputs (Resource/Risk) *
13Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Stage 1 (Option Definition support ) selected further review in Stage 2 (Options Appraisal support)Models selected for further review
Outcomes
The models selected for review at Stage 2 were as follows:1. Local authority as general promoter of Green Deal market.2. Local authority as marketer/facilitator.3. Local authority as large scale Green Deal provider.
These models are described in more detail on the following slides.
Ref: 11250255
LA asmarketer/ facilitator
LA as largescale GDP
LA as general
promoter
Resource/Risk
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Stage 1 (Option Definition support ) selected three as core models for further review in Stage 2 (Options Appraisal support)
The following models were rejected by the project team at Stage 1:► Do nothing – there was insufficient
confidence in the market to deliver in line with the aspirations of the GM Housing Retrofit Strategy without public sector intervention
► AGMA as a small-scale Green Deal provider – this model would not be capable of achieving the key project objective of large scale delivery. It was recognised that large scale delivery. It was recognised that some LAs may apply this model individually.
► AGMA participation in a retrofit guarantee fund was rejected on the basis that the guarantee fund will require funding. This was something that the project team concluded would not be attractive to AGMA. It was also noted that retail banks may be reluctant to provide long term fixed rate loans.
Appendix A describes the models that were rejected at Stage 1 in more detail.
14Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Core Model 1: Local Authority as general promoter of Green Deal market – schematic
Finance vehicle(s)
GDP 1 GDP 2 GDP 3 GDP
Ref: 11250255
Broad marketing
Local authorityFramework of approved GD providers which could be run by anchor authority or AGMA for all LAs
The Local Authority provides broad marketing support to a panel of approved Green Deal providers. Under the variant of this model where LAs choose a preferred Green Deal provider for their respective area, the marketing/brand support is provided by the Local Authority to the individual (or multiple) Green Deal Provider(s).
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Model 1: Local Authority as general promoter of Green Deal
Variant on model► For this model there can either be a
framework of approved GDPs for Local Authorities to choose from, as shown in the diagram on the left, or there can be one-to-one relationships between Local Authorities and individual or multiple GDPs for their respective areas.
GDP 4, etc.,
TGDFC
Framework of approved GD providers which could be run by anchor authority or AGMA for
The Local Authority provides broad marketing support to a panel of approved Green Deal providers. Under the variant of this model where LAs choose a preferred Green Deal provider for their respective area, the marketing/brand support is provided by the Local Authority to the individual (or multiple) Green Deal Provider(s).
15Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Operating model:► LA provides broad marketing support (e.g., leafleting, events, advertisements etc), using a framework of GDPs for delivery.► Framework of approved GDPs could be run by anchor authority or AGMA for all LAs.► Multiple GDPs can operate in each LA.► A variant on this model would be for individual LAs to choose just one GDP for their respective area from the available panel of GDPs, as
opposed to having a number of GDPs in operation. This variant would enable individual LAs to tailor a preferred approach by to maximise any benefit of existing arrangements, but would also need to be cognisant of the model’s commercial principles anagreements, such as payment terms.
Financing the marketing programmes:► LA costs limited to procurement and general marketing expenses.
Local Authority as general promoter of Green Deal market model and approach to financing
Ref: 11250255 Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
LA provides broad marketing support (e.g., leafleting, events, advertisements etc), using a framework of GDPs for delivery.Framework of approved GDPs could be run by anchor authority or AGMA for all LAs.
LAs to choose just one GDP for their respective area from the available panel of GDPs, as opposed to having a number of GDPs in operation. This variant would enable individual LAs to tailor a preferred approach by locality and to maximise any benefit of existing arrangements, but would also need to be cognisant of the model’s commercial principles and
Local Authority as general promoter of Green Deal market - operating
16Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Strengths, weaknesses and dependencies of local authority as general promoter modelStrengths Weaknesses► No long term financial exposure.
► Costs limited to costs of procurement and general marketing.
► Limited ability to drive broad outcomes on jobs, fuel poverty and low carbon economy.
► No guarantee that programme will be delivered.
► Limited use of strong local authority positioning to attract ECO.
► Ability to attract ECO based on capability of Green Deal providers.
Ref: 11250255
This model minimises LA long term exposure but may also limit their capabilities to deliver desired outcomes.
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Strengths, weaknesses and dependencies of local authority as
DependenciesLimited ability to drive broad outcomes on jobs, fuel poverty and low carbon economy.
No guarantee that programme will be
Limited use of strong local authority positioning to attract ECO.
Ability to attract ECO based on capability of Green Deal providers.
► Creation of financing vehicles such as TGDFC.
► Availability of strong Green Deal provider market from which to choose the panel.
LA long term exposure but may also limit their capabilities to deliver desired outcomes.
17Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Core Model 2: LA as a marketer/facilitator Finance vehicle(s)
GDP 1 GDP 2 GDP 3 GDP
Marketing and Surveying Referral fee
Ref: 11250255
The second model suggests that the local authority takes on adoption risk by investing in a marketing programme, but spreads delivery risk, and does not take on finance risks.
Marketing and Surveying OrganisationReferral fee
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
TGDFC
2: LA as a marketer/facilitator – schematic
GDP 4, etc.,Marketing for a panel of GDPs – potentially procured through a framework contract
LA investment into own programme or third party
The second model suggests that the local authority takes on adoption risk by investing in a marketing programme, but spreads
programme or third party vehicle
18Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Operating model:► Provides marketing support and potentially Green Deal assessments.► Receives referrals fees from Green Deal providers on the panel.► Can operate for a number of local authorities using their individual brand.► Not for profit or for-profit model.
Relationship with Green Deal providers:► Gives householders choice and spreads risk by engaging with a number of Green Deal providers.► Local authorities will have to take some responsibility for quality control as its brand and reputation will be at risk.► Opportunity for local authorities to drive job creation through the use of the Green Deal provider panel
procured framework contract.
LA as marketer/facilitator – operating model, relationship with Green Deal Providers and approach to financing and returns
Ref: 11250255
procured framework contract.
Financing the marketing programmes:► Local authority provides development finance.► Can look for support from the Green Deal providers.► Recovered through referral fees.
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Provides marketing support and potentially Green Deal assessments.
Can operate for a number of local authorities using their individual brand.
Gives householders choice and spreads risk by engaging with a number of Green Deal providers.Local authorities will have to take some responsibility for quality control as its brand and reputation will be at risk.Opportunity for local authorities to drive job creation through the use of the Green Deal provider panel – potentially delivered through a
operating model, relationship with Green Deal Providers and approach to financing and returns
19Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Strengths, weaknesses and dependencies of local authority as marketer/facilitator modelStrengths Weaknesses► Capital investment limited to start up costs
for marketing programme.
► Can focus marketing on target areas based on fuel poverty targets and other desired outcomes.
► Relatively straight forward tender for panel.
► Suitable for joint working by multiple local authorities.
► No long term balance sheet exposure.
► LA takes adoption risk.
► Ability to attract ECO driven by choice of Green Deal providers.
► Need to procure and agree marketing fee.
► Exposure to brand damage from Green Deal providers poor delivery.
► Potential for Green Deal providers to avoid difficult deliveries.
Ref: 11250255
For this model to work there needs to be a strong Green Deal provider sector and for the LA to be prepared to take some adoption risk.
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Strengths, weaknesses and dependencies of local authority as
DependenciesLA takes adoption risk.
Ability to attract ECO driven by choice of Green Deal providers.
Need to procure and agree marketing fee.
Exposure to brand damage from Green Deal providers poor delivery.
Potential for Green Deal providers to avoid
► Creation of financing vehicles such as TGDFC.
► Availability of strong Green Deal provider market from which to choose the panel.
► Need to clarify marketing responsibilities with Green Deal providers and manage potential conflicts.
For this model to work there needs to be a strong Green Deal provider sector and for the LA to be prepared to take some
20Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Core Model 3: LA as large scale Green Deal provider
Anchor LA +partner LAs
Delivery partner
Finance vehicle
Ref: 11250255
The third model has a local authority procuring a single delivery partner and providing finance. Finance could be sourced through Public Works Loans Board or the Green Deal Finance Company (TGDFC).
Marketing
Delivery (via panel of installers)
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
LA as large scale Green Deal provider – schematic
Finance vehicle
TGDFC
Refinance once track record in place
Bank finance
The third model has a local authority procuring a single delivery partner and providing finance. Finance could be sourced through Public Works Loans Board or the Green Deal Finance Company (TGDFC).
Delivery (via panel of installers)
21Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Operating model:► LA procures a single delivery partner and provides finance (including set up costs).► Finance could be sourced through Public Works Loans Board or TGDFC► Once scale achieved, and a track record is in place, refinancing can occur such that private sector takes long term financial► Ability for one local authority to lead as anchor and others to join on an incremental basis.► Opportunity for local authorities to drive job creation and create a low carbon sector, in particular localities if desired.
The model is already being developed by Birmingham City Council and Newcastle City Council
Birmingham► Cabinet decision in April 2011.
► Initial programme of 15,000 private and social houses valued at
Ref: 11250255
► Initial programme of 15,000 private and social houses valued at £100m.
► Option to extend to 60,000 houses and £400m.
► OJEU and PQQ issued in Sep 2011.
► 22 out of 33 partners named on contract are West Midland Local authorities
► Now covers non-domestic stock (value to all contracting authorities estimated at £60.91m for pathfinder programme and £118.33m for extension phase, compared to £215.66m and £456.44m respectively for domestic stock)
► 11 other public sector organisations, including housing associations and police/fire, are named on the OJEU with their own finance to access the delivery partner services.
► Valued at £275m with option to extend to £1.5b.
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
LA procures a single delivery partner and provides finance (including set up costs).Finance could be sourced through Public Works Loans Board or TGDFC.Once scale achieved, and a track record is in place, refinancing can occur such that private sector takes long term financial risks.Ability for one local authority to lead as anchor and others to join on an incremental basis.Opportunity for local authorities to drive job creation and create a low carbon sector, in particular localities if desired.
The model is already being developed by Birmingham City Council
Newcastle► Cabinet decision in July 2011.
► Recognised need to work with neighbouring authorities to ► Recognised need to work with neighbouring authorities to achieve scale.
► Opened up to North East councils.
► Cabinet voted to proceed with procurement in January 2012.
► Strong support from North East councils.
► Five out of 12 local authorities committed in total.
► Financial and legal advisors procured.
► Project governance and procurement programme being established.
22Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Strengths, weakness and dependencies of the local authority as a Green Deal Provider modelStrengths Weaknesses► Delivery partner is responsible for delivery
programmes according to agreed scale and to contract.
► Guarantees presence of delivery capability with strength to access ECO support.
► Long term financial risks taken by private sector.
► Ability to create local jobs and low carbon sector.
Other LAs can join on an incremental basis
► Local authority takes short term and first loss risk.
► Set up costs at risk.
► Ability to attract ECO driven by choice of Green Deal provider.
► Bank fees, if bank finance used needs to be recovered through price to householder.
► Scale required to achieve critical mass to allow refinancing.
Ref: 11250255
► Other LAs can join on an incremental basis once work is underway by the lead LA.
► Ability to drive delivery into particular locality.
► Governance model needs to be agreed for co-operating authorities
► Risk of project failure should the single delivery partner fail
LAs that find this model attractive will be happy to take on some risk and make a sizeable investment commitment in order to achieve some certainty around a large scale programme.
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Strengths, weakness and dependencies of the local authority as a
DependenciesLocal authority takes short term and first
Ability to attract ECO driven by choice of Green Deal provider.
Bank fees, if bank finance used needs to be recovered through price to householder.
Scale required to achieve critical mass to
► Successful delivery of the Birmingham City Council procurement programme to prove model and provide IP.
► Requires one anchor LA to work with other partner LAs.
► Confirmation that State Aid legislation is complied with.
Governance model needs to be agreed for operating authorities.
Risk of project failure should the single
LAs that find this model attractive will be happy to take on some risk and make a sizeable investment commitment in order to
23Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Section 4
Stage 2: Options Appraisal
Ref: 11250255
Stage 2: Options AppraisalStage 2: Options AppraisalStage 2: Options Appraisal
Stage 2 developed the evaluation methodology and facilitated a Greater Manchester workshop to agree which models to take forward► A workshop (Core Model Selection workshop) was held on 18
January 2012 at which the AGMA Local Authorities, local social housing providers, and other relevant local public sector bodies were represented. A full list of attendees is provided at Appendix D.
► The workshop had the following aims:► To select two local authority housing retrofit models to take
forward to initial business case development► To drive the options appraisal of Housing Retrofit models
leading to business case for a preferred model► To inform and obtain buy-in from stakeholders
Ref: 11250255 Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Stage 2 developed the evaluation methodology and facilitated a Greater Manchester workshop to agree which models to take forward
Workshop Structure ► Overview: Greater Manchester and the Green Deal► Briefing on the three Local Authority Models► Consideration of Inputs and Outputs► Break-out 1 – Groups considered:► Inputs: What they would be prepared to put into the project ► Outputs: What they want to get out of the project
► Break-out 2 – Groups discussed each model in detail and listed strengths, weaknesses and dependencies
► Deselection of one model► Deselection of one model► Overview of next steps
25Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Overview, Briefing on Local Authority Models and Consideration of Inputs and Outputs
► An overview of Greater Manchester and the Green Deal was presented, following which the three Local Authority Models were presented and discussed. The presentation is provided at Appendix C for information
► There was also an initial discussion in respect of the desired outputs from the Project and the level of input that Local Authorities (e.g., start up funding, ongoing investment, staff and expertise, project leadership) would be prepared to put in.
► Examples of inputs and outcomes were provided as follows:
► Outputs/Outcomes: What does my LA want out of the Project?►
►
►
►
►
►
Ref: 11250255 Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
►
►
►
►
►
►
►
►
►
►
Overview, Briefing on Local Authority Models and Consideration of
Outputs/Outcomes: What does my LA want out of the Project?► Add real value versus the market ► Provide first mover economic advantage► Accelerate take up of retrofit measures ► Maximises the level of ECO etc tackle Hard to Treat properties /
Fuel Poverty► Creation of a sustainable market ► Model applicable to all housing tenures
26Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
► Flexible if not all sector involved► Encourages spatial approach► Flexible to meet the potentially differing needs of LAs► Adaptable to public building stock and commercial buildings► Return on investment for any GM investment / borrowing► Recovery of GM costs over defined period ► Running within 12 months of the GD launch ► Inclusive of the most deprived communities► Builds behaviour change► Attracts external finance – funding and /or re-financing
Overview, Briefing on Local Authority Models and Consideration of Inputs and Outputs (cont.)
►Inputs: What is my LA prepared to put into the Project?► Investment – Set Up Costs► Investment – Ongoing delivery costs► Public sector resource input– Set Up► Public sector resource input– Delivery► Use of brand to sign up householders ► Adoption risk► Exposed to risk
- Brand exposure
► Inputs and Outputs were further discussed in the first breakgroup, the outputs of which are summarised on the following slides.
Ref: 11250255
- Brand exposure- Investment- Bad debts
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Overview, Briefing on Local Authority Models and Consideration of
Inputs and Outputs were further discussed in the first break-out group, the outputs of which are summarised on the following slides.
27Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Break-out 1: Consideration of Inputs and Outputs
► Delegates were allocated to one of four break-out groups. The groups were arranged such that each contained a crossLAs, supplemented by local social housing providers and other public sector representation in attendance. Each group was askidentify inputs and desired outputs/outcomes on a chart similar to that shown below, in order to understand the models that aaligned to LAs.
► This indicated where LAs, according to the distribution of inputs and outputs, might be on the chart. Examples of activity ouLAs are shown on the following slides.
LA as largescale GDP
Ref: 11250255 Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
LA asmarketer/ facilitator
scale GDP
LA as general
promoter
Resource/Risk
out 1: Consideration of Inputs and Outputs
out groups. The groups were arranged such that each contained a cross-section of LAs, supplemented by local social housing providers and other public sector representation in attendance. Each group was asked to identify inputs and desired outputs/outcomes on a chart similar to that shown below, in order to understand the models that are best
This indicated where LAs, according to the distribution of inputs and outputs, might be on the chart. Examples of activity output from
28Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Resource/Risk
Break-out 1: Consideration of Inputs and Outputs (cont.) Table 2 activity outputs
Ref: 11250255 Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
out 1: Consideration of Inputs and Outputs (cont.) – Table 1 and
29Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Break-out 1: Consideration of Inputs and Outputs (cont.) Table 4 activity outputs
Ref: 11250255 Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
out 1: Consideration of Inputs and Outputs (cont.) – Table 3 and
30Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Break-out 1: Consideration of Inputs and Outputs (cont.) considerationsIn addition to the production of the charts, the following key issues
were raised by each group:Table 1Additional points raised by the group were as follows:► There is insufficient confidence in the market to deliver against
Greater Manchester’s low carbon aspirations without meaningful intervention by AGMA.
► Control over selection of the delivery supply chain is important, considering both who and how it is employed, and how quality of delivery is managed.
► Social housing stock is key to providing guaranteed number of
Ref: 11250255
► Social housing stock is key to providing guaranteed number of units in order to meet minimum number required to make models sustainable and to attract the private sector.
► Delivery skills and expertise may already exist with AGMA, e.g., marketing and property assessment. This needs to be considered when defining the final delivery model.
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
out 1: Consideration of Inputs and Outputs (cont.) – additional
Table 2 Participants on Table 2 included minimal representation from LAs,
and therefore the responses to the ‘Input / Output exercise’ took a different approach to the other groups. Considerations included:
► Key requirement is to generate a vibrant local market for suppliers and installers. It was crucial that new entrants could be part of this market. This would generate local employment and encourage community participation in the Green Deal.
► A particularly challenging output was ensuring that the delivery model could deal with whole house measures, i.e., do more than Green Deal. There was concern that if initial delivery of retrofit
31Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Green Deal. There was concern that if initial delivery of retrofit was restricted to Green Deal only, then ultimately AGMA might not meet the challenging CO2 reduction targets.
► The delivery partner would need to be flexible enough to deal with more than residential properties, e.g., own estate.
► Ability of organisations represented on the table to provide inputs was limited as unlike a Local Authority they were not likely to access significant resources in terms of project management support and / or prudential borrowing. However, social housing providers did recognise their ability to de-risk the project by providing social housing stock, e.g., voids, in a phased approach.
► It was felt that it was important that AGMA and its partners could be involved in the assessment of properties in the early years of delivery.
Break-out 1: Consideration of Inputs and Outputs (cont.) considerations (cont.)
Table 3Additional points raised by the group were as follows:► There is a need to understand what the models will deliver
beyond Green Deal and how they will help achieve the broad ambitions of the low carbon economy.
► There are differences in appetites and ambitions between the local authorities and these need to be accommodated.
► There was a feeling that there are still too many unknowns on the legislation and that as a result it is difficult to adopt a position. It was recognised that this may be because LAs do not know the
Ref: 11250255
was recognised that this may be because LAs do not know the detail rather than that enough detail has not been published. As such, there may therefore be a requirement for Greater Manchester to further develop its understanding of the Green Deal.
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
out 1: Consideration of Inputs and Outputs (cont.) – additional
Table 4
32Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Break-out 2 – Groups discussed each model in detail and listed strengths, weaknesses and dependenciesThe following themes emerged within the four break-out groups:Model 1 - Local Authority as general promoter of Green Deal
marketAdvantages:► Cheapest optionDisadvantages/Risks:► Very limited LA control means that outcomes are very hard to
direct► Risk of Green Deal Providers cherry picking properties and
avoiding those with the greatest needAssumes active/strong Green Deal Providers – lack of confidence
Ref: 11250255
► Assumes active/strong Green Deal Providers – lack of confidence that this is the case
► Local Authorities are not specialist marketers
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
discussed each model in detail and listed strengths, weaknesses and dependencies
Model 2 - LA as a marketer/facilitatorAdvantages:► Assessments could include wider home energy efficiency
assessments i.e., should not just be limited to Green Deal► Panel of GDPs is more attractive than a single GDP – manages
the risk of delivery failure and exclusion of market conditions/competition.
► May support desire to maximise the local delivery marketDisadvantages/Risks:
Requires a referral fee that is acceptable to the private sector in
33Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
► Requires a referral fee that is acceptable to the private sector in order to recover costs
► Need to assess whether advice is truly independent. Recognition that there is a risk that AGMA may lose credibility if not.
► Need to ensure that there a joined up approach to delivery (i.e., marketing organisation, assessing and surveying, sign up of properties, delivery) and determine the optimal structure to do so
Break-out 2 – Groups discussed each model in detail and listed strengths, weaknesses and dependencies (cont.)► Model 3 – Local Authority as large scale Green Deal providerAdvantages:► Provides the most control over (i.e., certainty of) outputs ► Offers the opportunity to undertake improvement works wider than
just those linked to the Green Deal.► Model is adaptable for other similar projects, including public
sector buildings, commercial buildings and possibly heat networksDisadvantages/Risks:► This model exposes the public sector to the greatest financial risk.
However, this exposure would be incremental in line with the build programme
Ref: 11250255
programme► Any public sector investment will need to be fully appraised and
approved. Uncertainty in respect of the appetite Local Government PWLB borrowing.
► Further consideration is required to explore the balance between political drive and the need for financial returns on investment
► Risk that Green Deal provider will have taken over the local market by the time Greater Manchester procures a partner
► Nervousness if single Green Deal provider► Will this remove competition and result in a worse deal /
less choice for consumers?► Risk of project failure should the single delivery partner fail
► Are we able to achieve the desired scale of no less than 15,000 units? General view is that this is achievable.
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
discussed each model in detail and listed strengths, weaknesses and dependencies (cont.)
Other themes / considerations► Importance of providing a delivery structure that can:
► Deliver other similar projects (i.e., reduction in timeframe to procure, cost to establish, consistency of governance arrangements)
► Be readily expandable to deliver a potentially significantly larger programme
► Be adaptable, e.g., transferable to public sector and private sector commercial retrofit
34Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Break-out 2: Summary ConclusionsSummary conclusions – Break-out Session 2► Model 1 (Local Authority as general promoter of Green Deal market)
break-out groups.► The rationale for the general promoter model being the least preferable model included:► this was seen as the base / do nothing equivalent option, and therefore should not be considered as the preferred delivery mo► LAs may undertake a general promotion role anyway either as an interim measure or in addition to the preferred model► the model provides insufficient control and certainty over delivery
► Model 2 (LA as a marketer/facilitator) and Model 3 (LA as large scale Green Deal provider) were identified as the most attracdelegates in all break-out groups
Ref: 11250255 Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
out 2: Summary Conclusions
Local Authority as general promoter of Green Deal market) was identified as the least preferable model by delegates in all
The rationale for the general promoter model being the least preferable model included:this was seen as the base / do nothing equivalent option, and therefore should not be considered as the preferred delivery modelLAs may undertake a general promotion role anyway either as an interim measure or in addition to the preferred modelthe model provides insufficient control and certainty over delivery
Model 2 (LA as a marketer/facilitator) and Model 3 (LA as large scale Green Deal provider) were identified as the most attractive by
35Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Workshop Summary ConclusionsSummary conclusions► Deselected Model: Model 1 (Local Authority as general promoter of Green Deal market), but recognition that this could be
fallback position if Model 2 and Model 3 do not work► Models to be taken forward to Stage 3 (Initial Business Case development): ► Model 2 (LA as a marketer/facilitator) ► Model 3 (LA as large scale Green Deal provider)
► Key considerations for ongoing development of Model 2 and Model 3:► Senior level engagement – The project team will need to engage with senior officials across AGMA to ensure they are bought into
Project. Ideally these will have some influence over decision making.► An adaptable model structure is required to enable similar projects to be delivered under a single consistent framework / del
Ref: 11250255
► An adaptable model structure is required to enable similar projects to be delivered under a single consistent framework / delmodel
► Consideration is required in respect of the number of delivery partners. The core ‘assumes a single delivery partner, but there may be a requirement to consider a greater number of delivery partners. It is nthis may increase procurement costs and timescales, and may mean that scale has to be increased in order to remain attractivemarket.
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Local Authority as general promoter of Green Deal market), but recognition that this could be used as a
Models to be taken forward to Stage 3 (Initial Business Case development):
Key considerations for ongoing development of Model 2 and Model 3:The project team will need to engage with senior officials across AGMA to ensure they are bought into the
Project. Ideally these will have some influence over decision making.An adaptable model structure is required to enable similar projects to be delivered under a single consistent framework / delivery An adaptable model structure is required to enable similar projects to be delivered under a single consistent framework / delivery
Consideration is required in respect of the number of delivery partners. The core ‘LA as large scale Green Deal provider’ currently assumes a single delivery partner, but there may be a requirement to consider a greater number of delivery partners. It is noted that this may increase procurement costs and timescales, and may mean that scale has to be increased in order to remain attractive to the
36Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Section 4
Next steps
Ref: 11250255
Next steps
Stage 3 summary:► Develop two preferred options through the consideration of the financial and investment options to support Greater Manchester
of a single preferred option. This will be achieved via modelling to consider the financial and investment options associateoption. Our review will consider AGMA data in respect of:► the baseline property portfolio, profiled by year► baseline retrofit programme, including measures, costs, efficiency savings, and FIT/RHI income (if applicable)
► We will undertake a high level ‘critical friend’ review of AGMA data prior to undertaking modelling.
The next steps of the project will be:
Stage 1: Option Definition support
Stage 2 Options Appraisal support
Ref: 11250255
► Shortlist of high level options for appraisal at Stage 2
► Develop options to support selection of single option
► Consider financial and investment options via modelling
► Consider AGMA data, including high level ‘critical friend’ review of AGMA data
► Financial and investment model for each option
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
ü
► Core Model Selection workshop18 January 2012
► Presentation of findings in summary report
ü
Develop two preferred options through the consideration of the financial and investment options to support Greater Manchester’s selection of a single preferred option. This will be achieved via modelling to consider the financial and investment options associated with each
baseline retrofit programme, including measures, costs, efficiency savings, and FIT/RHI income (if applicable)We will undertake a high level ‘critical friend’ review of AGMA data prior to undertaking modelling.
The next steps of the project will be:
Stage 3Initial Business Case development support
Stage 4Final Business Case development supportdevelopment support development support
Develop options to support selection of single option Consider financial and investment options via modellingConsider AGMA data, including high level ‘critical friend’ review of AGMA data Financial and investment model for each option
► Further iteration of the financial and investment model
► Consideration of- Role of the public sector- Financing options - AGMA investment- Set up costs and recovery
► Risk Management workshop
► Support development of action plan for procurement and/or implementation phase
38Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
The key remaining project milestones Milestone Approval for selection of two models to be taken forwards Report circulated: Stage 1 and Stage 2
Initial Business Case development in respect of the two preferred models Selection and approval of the final preferred model
Final Business Case development in respect of final preferred model
Submission of Final Business Case for approvalDelivery of project plan to implement approved housing retrofit model
Ref: 11250255 Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
milestones are as followsDateJanuary 2012w/c 6 January 2012
Business Case development in respect of the two preferred models February 2012End of February 2012
March 2012
March/April 2012April 2012
39Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Key engagement with stakeholders and decision makers follows
Engagement Activity with Stakeholders & Decision Makers
Paper to WLT
Workshop at Social Housing Low Carbon Group meeting
Presentation to LCEA Board Sub Group for WP1
Stakeholder Workshop (2)
Paper to COG
Local Authority specific briefings on project to senior managers
Stage 3 - Initial Business Case development
Ref: 11250255
Local Authority specific briefings on project to senior managers
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Engagement Activity with Stakeholders & Decision MakersSummary of Stage 3 circulated to highlight final preferred model
Presentation to COG
Paper WLT
Paper to Environment Commission
LCEA Board sub Group for WP1
Stage 4 - Final Business Case development
Key engagement with stakeholders and decision makers ois as
Date
w/c 13th Feb
w/c 20th Feb
28th Feb
28th Feb
7th March
Tameside: w/c 27th Feb Tameside: w/c 27th Feb Salford: w/c 5th March
40Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Datew/c 5th March
7th March (TBC)
w/c 12th March
21st March
2nd April
Appendix A
Two rejected models
Ref: 11250255
Two rejected models
LA as small scale Green Deal Provider
Delivery vehicle
Finance
Marketing
Local authority
Ref: 11250255
In house or private sector procured
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
LA as small scale Green Deal Provider – Schematic
Finance
Financed either through prudential borrowing (most
likely due to smaller scale), bank finance
or TGDFC
In house or private sector procured
42Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
On-the-ground examples of small scale programmesHaringey► Pilot GD/retrofit scheme.
► £500k provided and underwritten by council.
► Subsidised loan provided to residents to implement measures at 2.5% interest rate.
► Not ring-fenced. Sits within council’s budget.
► Launched Saturday 3 Dec.
► No installers identified yet.
Ref: 11250255 Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
ground examples of small scale programmesMerton (in development)► Domestic Repair and Improvement Loan.
► £100k in revolving loan fund. Max £5k loans with tenure of up to 5 years.
► Interest at Bank of England + 1%, fixed at commencement of loan.
► For small repairs-type works, solid wall insulation, renewable energy installations.
► Available to:
► Owner/occupiers on low income but not in receipt of benefit.
► Private landlords with tenants in receipt of benefits.► Private landlords with tenants in receipt of benefits.
43Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Strengths Weaknesses► Low cost recoverable finance available
through local authority balance sheets and prudential borrowing.
► Relatively quick to implement.
► Simple and can be limited to a single LA programme.
► Does not provide the ability to deliver programmes at scale.
► LA has to retain finance on balance sheet until repaid.
► Delivery vehicles likely to be unrated meaning refinance not possible or requires local authority underwriting.
► LA takes on majority of risks.
► Start up and fixed costs have to be financed by local authority.
Review of small scale programmes
Ref: 11250255
financed by local authority.
Whilst this is relatively easy to implement within one LA it is not something that is scalable.
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
DependenciesDoes not provide the ability to deliver programmes at scale.
LA has to retain finance on balance sheet
Delivery vehicles likely to be unrated meaning refinance not possible or requires local authority underwriting.
LA takes on majority of risks.
Start up and fixed costs have to be financed by local authority.
► Availability of funds in revenue accounts for start up and fixed costs.
financed by local authority.
Whilst this is relatively easy to implement within one LA it is not something that is scalable.
44Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Retrofit Guarantee Fund – Schematic
Local authority
Retailbank Finance
Guarantee Fund
Guaranteecontract
► Takes first loss risk away from retail
Finance
Ref: 11250255
Installers► Takes first loss risk away from retail
banks.► Financing of 5► Ideally non-profit making with zero cost
finance.
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Schematic
Central Government/Grant/
Other Funding
Contract
Takes first loss risk away from retail
Finance
Finance
Takes first loss risk away from retail
Financing of 5-10% of total costs.profit making with zero cost
45Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Model developed for the World Bank► In operation in East Europe, Russia, China, and Mexico.► Hungary ~10 years of operation. Delivered 100,000 energy efficiency installations without further public subsidy.
Development in the UKCommunity Housing Cymru and 7 Welsh housing associations► Aims to develop a sustainable programme of solar PV and low carbon initiatives.► Welsh Government has funded the project set-up costs.► Each HA committing 100 PV installations and contributing money to establish fund.
Radian Housing Association
On-the-ground examples/development of Retrofit Guarantee Fund
Ref: 11250255
Radian Housing Association► Launched Retrofit South East project in October 2009 with GESB.► 18 month project aiming to develop model for low carbon retrofit of social housing.
Severn Wye Energy Agency► Looking to roll out model in South West of England and Wales.► Pilot of 300-500 homes focusing on owner occupiers, to complement social housing providers.
This model has been successfully implemented in Eastern/Central Europe and is being reviewed by some housing associations in the UK, although there is little evidence of bank appetite.► No retail bank publicly supporting.► Retail banks not set up for long term fixed rate finance.► No obvious source of funds for guarantee fund.
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Hungary ~10 years of operation. Delivered 100,000 energy efficiency installations without further public subsidy.
Community Housing Cymru and 7 Welsh housing associationsAims to develop a sustainable programme of solar PV and low carbon initiatives.
Each HA committing 100 PV installations and contributing money to establish fund.
ground examples/development of Retrofit Guarantee Fund
18 month project aiming to develop model for low carbon retrofit of social housing.
500 homes focusing on owner occupiers, to complement social housing providers.
This model has been successfully implemented in Eastern/Central Europe and is being reviewed by some housing associations
46Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Review of retrofit guarantee fundStrengths Weaknesses► Low demand for public sector finance so
limiting balance sheet exposure.
► No need to deal with private sector finance for initial finance or refinance programmes.
► Ability to scale up once initial model proves satisfactory.
► Relies on banks switching position on appetite for long term fixed rate finance.
► Requires banks to create supporting systems and processes.
► Guarantee fund requires funding.
► Guarantee fund will have to make a return if zero cost finance not available.
► No UK or Western Europe precedent.
► Limited role for local authorities in
Ref: 11250255
► Limited role for local authorities in marketing and in attracting ECO.
► Unclear who will be driving takeother models.
The guarantee fund reduces the amount of public sector funds required but there is no evidence of retail bank appetite at themoment.
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
DependenciesRelies on banks switching position on appetite for long term fixed rate finance.
Requires banks to create supporting systems and processes.
Guarantee fund requires funding.
Guarantee fund will have to make a return if zero cost finance not available.
No UK or Western Europe precedent.
Limited role for local authorities in
► Appetite from retail banks to take on adoption risk and provide long term finance.
► Creation and funding of guarantee fund.
Limited role for local authorities in marketing and in attracting ECO.
Unclear who will be driving take-up vs.
The guarantee fund reduces the amount of public sector funds required but there is no evidence of retail bank appetite at the
47Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Appendix B
Green Deal Finance Company
Ref: 11250255
Green Deal Finance Company BackgroundGreen Deal Finance Company Green Deal Finance Company
The Green Deal Finance Company (TGDFC)
Banks
£? Refinance programme► PWC► Banks► Energy
Companies► Building
firms
GIB
Ref: 11250255
Green Deal provider
1. Measures delivered to property
2. Fund pays GDP3. Property pays back fund over up to 25 years (or less)
TGDFC (www.thegreendealfinancecompany.com) has been formed to provide finance to Green Deal providers. This is currently under development and awaits confirmation of finance (both for set up and during delivery).
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
The Green Deal Finance Company (TGDFC)Key issuesFinance► Will it be at scale?► Will GIB finance?► Will banks provide?► What will be the cost of capital?
Green Deal providers► What restrictions from banks?► Access to ECO?► What obligations to local jobs?
Refinance programme
► What obligations to local jobs?► What obligation to long term service?
Householders► What credit risk restrictions?► Restrictions on solar PV or RH?
Operations► Who will pay for set up?
► Who will operate?
State Aid► How much will be obtained?
pays back fund over up to 25 years (or less)
TGDFC (www.thegreendealfinancecompany.com) has been formed to provide finance to Green Deal providers. This is currently under development and awaits confirmation of finance (both for set up and during delivery).
49Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
Appendix C
Core Model Selection workshop
Ref: 11250255
Core Model Selection workshop18 January 2012 – Slide PackCore Model Selection workshopCore Model Selection workshop
Slide Pack
Appendix D
Core Model Selection workshop
Ref: 11250255
Core Model Selection workshop18 January 2012 – AttendeesCore Model Selection workshopCore Model Selection workshop
Attendees
Core Model Selection workshop 18 Attendee Organisation AttendeeAbdul Jabbar Rochdale MBC Jonny SadlerAdam Hackett Oldham MBC; Lance SaxbyAlison Lloyd-Walsh Tameside MBC Linda Comstive CoarAndrew Mee Ernst and Young Lisa HoylandAndy Hunt Trafford MBC Mark AthertonAnne Parkes GM housing retrofit team Matt RobertsAshley Crumbley Wigan and Leigh Housing Matt StockwellBrian Ollerenshaw Bury MBC, Michael BerringtonCarl hallworth Manchester CC, Michael O'dohertyCharlie Baker Urbed Paul LiddyChristoph Harwood Marksman Consulting Paul Longshaw
Ref: 11250255
Christoph Harwood Marksman Consulting Paul LongshawDavid Kemp Procure + Paul MurphyFreda Reiss Bury MBC, Peter MaynardGary Mongan Tameside MBC, Peter Smith
Gema Thompson Manchester CC - Finance Tim Barwood
Ian Taylor GMCVO Tina GandhiJames Noakes Wigan MBC, Todd HoldenJohn Eley Oldham College, Venetia KnightJonathan Atkinson Manchester Carbon Coop Will Swan
Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support
workshop 18 January 2012 – AttendeesAttendee OrganisationJonny Sadler MCC Env StrategyLance Saxby ESTLinda Comstive Coar Manchester CC - LegalLisa Hoyland AGMA Mark Atherton AGMA Matt Roberts Salix HomesMatt Stockwell Wigan MBCMichael Berrington Ernst and YoungMichael O'doherty GM Housing RetrofitPaul Liddy Stockport MBCPaul Longshaw Salford CCPaul Longshaw Salford CCPaul Murphy Manchester CC - ProcurementPeter Maynard Rochdale MBCPeter Smith St Vincents HA,
Tim Barwood ESTac and GM Housing retrofit team prog manager
Tina Gandhi Bolton MBC, Todd Holden GM ChamberVenetia Knight GroundworkWill Swan Salford University
52Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit Business Case Support