Social housing providers have a variety of funding options for energy efficiency upgrades. Two prominent schemes, ECO4 and the Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund (SHDF), each offer unique advantages. But for providers looking to save costs and maximise the number of properties upgraded, ECO4 funding often stands out. Here, we’ll break down the key differences and advantages of ECO4 over the SHDF.
No Cost to Social Housing Providers
- ECO4: Covers 100% of the costs for eligible energy efficiency upgrades, such as heating, insulation, and renewable energy measures. Social housing providers face zero costs for assessments, installations, or administration.
- SHDF: Typically requires a 50% co-funding contribution from the housing provider, making it a more costly option for providers looking to upgrade their properties at scale. There’s also restrictive delivery targets and deadlines to meet and an obligation to deliver measures to the agreed number of properties within a certain timeframe which many social housing providers struggle to meet. If targets or deadlines fail to be met penalties can be imposed, such as the level of future SHDF funding could be reduced. There are no such deadlines, targets, commitments or obligations associated with ECO4 funding whatsoever.
Maximising Property Upgrades through Strategic Allocation
- Case Example – Peabody: By reallocating 21 properties from SHDF to ECO4, Peabody managed to fund upgrades without any expense while preserving SHDF funds for properties that weren’t ECO4-eligible. This move allowed them to upgrade 21 additional properties through SHDF, creating a “double win.”
- Result: Through smart allocation, housing providers can double the impact of funding by utilising ECO4 for eligible properties and by allocating SHDF funding for EPC C and high rated EPC D properties which are not usually eligible for ECO4 funding.
Expansive Funding Availability
- ECO4: Delta Surveys Ltd has secured access to £20 million in ECO4 funding from Eon Energy, ensuring ample resources for social housing providers to access no-cost improvements. This guarantees that projects are delivered efficiently and in line with housing providers’ upgrade goals.
- SHDF: Availability of funds is often limited to specific funding rounds, and competition can be high. Providers may miss out on funding if their applications aren’t selected within these rounds.
Flexibility in Property Eligibility
- ECO4: Offers funding for a wide range of properties, especially those with EPC ratings of D or lower. Solar PV installations are now available for electric-heated blocks, covering all flats, on every floor level, without needing a 3-phase electricity supply.
- SHDF: Submitting mainly EPC C & high D rated properties for SHDF funding would add flexibility for providers who wish to target a broader range of properties.
Faster, Resident-Focused Delivery
- ECO4: The administration-free setup of ECO4 funding allows for streamlined project management, from assessments to installation, which Delta Surveys Ltd handles entirely. With resident coordination built into the process, housing providers can rest assured that upgrades will be delivered efficiently and with minimal disruption.
- SHDF: Due to the co-funding requirement and application-based structure, SHDF can have longer lead times due to the complex and burdensome administration required, creating a drain on resources which can delay the benefits to residents.
Conclusion:
For social housing providers, the choice between ECO4 and SHDF can significantly impact both the scope and cost of their energy efficiency projects. By utilising ECO4, providers can upgrade a far greater number of properties for no cost, strategically balance multiple funding sources, and ensure faster, resident-friendly delivery.
Delta Surveys Ltd specialises in maximising ECO4 funding opportunities, enabling social housing providers to achieve high-impact, cost-free upgrades with ease.