Single Local Growth Fund

Single Local Growth Fund
Name	Single Local Growth Fund
Established	2010s
Type	Public investment fund
Jurisdiction	Local authorities
Purpose	Infrastructure and development
Administration	Central and local agencies

Single Local Growth Fund

The Single Local Growth Fund is a public investment mechanism designed to channel capital into regional infrastructure projects, transport initiatives, housing schemes, and skills programmes. It aims to integrate funding streams from national bodies such as the Treasury, Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government with local delivery partners including combined authorities, unitary authorities, and local enterprise partnerships. The Fund operates alongside policies promoted by administrations like the Cabinet Office and interacts with national strategies such as the Industrial Strategy and regional development plans.

Background and Purpose

The Fund emerged amid policy debates involving actors such as the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Prime Minister, and senior officials at the Department for Transport and HM Treasury who sought to align national priorities with local needs. It was influenced by precedents including the Regional Growth Fund, the Local Growth Fund (England), and devolution deals negotiated with entities like the Greater Manchester Combined Authority and the West Midlands Combined Authority. Objectives reflect commitments in White Papers and spending reviews produced by the Office for Budget Responsibility, the National Audit Office, and ministers across administrations. Rationale drew on analyses by organisations including the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the Smith Institute, and think tanks such as the Local Government Association and Centre for Cities.

Administration and Funding Mechanism

Administration typically involves partnerships among central departments, treasury officials, and local bodies like combined authorities, county councils, metropolitan boroughs, and mayoral offices. Funding streams may be allocated through multi-year settlements determined by the Spending Review process, underpinned by fiscal rules overseen by the Office for Budget Responsibility. The mechanism coordinates grants, capital allocations, and match funding often drawn from schemes administered by the European Investment Bank, legacy European Regional Development Fund resources, and domestic programmes such as the Infrastructure and Projects Authority initiatives. Delivery agreements often require compliance with appraisal standards like those used by the Green Book and scrutiny from bodies including the National Audit Office and local overview and scrutiny committees.

Eligibility and Allocation Criteria

Eligibility criteria typically reference statutory and negotiated frameworks set by central departments and negotiating partners including mayors, combined authority chief executives, and local enterprise partnership chairs. Projects are appraised against metrics influenced by organisations such as the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, the Resolution Foundation, and academics at institutions like the London School of Economics, University of Oxford, and University of Cambridge. Allocation decisions incorporate cost–benefit analyses consistent with the Green Book, regional priorities set by devolved authorities like the Scottish Government and Welsh Government where comparable funds exist, and match funding requirements referencing investors such as the British Business Bank and private sector partners including infrastructure funds and pension investors like the Local Pensions Partnership.

Implementation and Governance

Implementation arrangements involve contracting with delivery partners such as Network Rail, Highways England, housing associations registered with the Homes England regulator, and training providers accredited by bodies like Ofsted and the Education and Skills Funding Agency. Governance frameworks often establish joint committees, investment boards, and accountable officers drawn from entities including the Local Government Association, mayoral combined authorities, and the Treasury Solicitor for legal advice. Monitoring and reporting use standards aligned with the National Audit Office guidance, performance regimes similar to those applied by the Infrastructure and Projects Authority, and evaluation frameworks referencing methods from the What Works Centre for Local Economic Growth.

Performance, Outcomes, and Evaluation

Evaluations have been commissioned from consultancies and research centres such as Ernst & Young, PwC, the Institute for Government, and universities like University College London and Imperial College London. Reported outcomes include completed transport upgrades, improved housing supply through partnerships with Homes England, and skilling programmes linked to employers represented by organisations like the Confederation of British Industry and the Federation of Small Businesses. Performance metrics often cite job creation, private sector leverage, and return on public investment as assessed by bodies like the National Audit Office and the Local Government Association.

Criticisms and Controversies

Critiques have come from parliamentary committees such as the Public Accounts Committee and policy commentators at the Institute for Fiscal Studies and Joseph Rowntree Foundation, focusing on issues including project selection, regional imbalance allegations raised in debates referenced by the House of Commons, transparency concerns highlighted by the National Audit Office, and accountability disputes involving mayors and central departments. Controversies have involved contested decisions around major schemes similar to disputes seen with projects like HS2 and locally sensitive developments in areas represented by MPs from parties including the Conservative Party and the Labour Party.

Category:Public finance