Twenty-Seventh Report - Green Homes Grant Voucher Scheme

Select Committee
Public Accounts Committee HC 635 1 December 2021
Report Status Government responded
Conclusions & Recommendations 29 items (10 recs)
Government Response (AI assessment · 29 of 29 classified)
Government response
Treasury minutes: Government response to the Committee of Public Accounts on the Twenty Seventh report from Session 2021-22 · published 1 Mar 2022

Recommendations & Conclusions

11 results
2 Recommendation Acknowledged
Despite clear warning signs, the Department proceeded with an unrealistic implementation timescale for the Green...
Recommendation
Despite clear warning signs, the Department proceeded with an unrealistic implementation timescale for the Green Homes Grant Voucher Scheme. The Department had twelve weeks to set up the Scheme from announcement to launch. It was confident this was possible based … Read more
Government Response Summary
The government states it agrees with the recommendation and will ensure clear metrics for reform programmes, publishing regular updates on their operational effectiveness, but it doesn't detail improvements to readiness testing or address the request to consider Ministerial Directions.
HM Treasury
View Details
7 Conclusion Acknowledged
These issues were further exacerbated by underperformance of the Scheme Administrator (ICF Consulting Services Ltd,...
Conclusion
These issues were further exacerbated by underperformance of the Scheme Administrator (ICF Consulting Services Ltd, a contractor appointed by the Department), creating delays in applications being processed and vouchers issued to homeowners, as well as in making payments to installers, … Read more
Government Response Summary
The government recognises the impact of the shortened timescale and acknowledges that the scheme administrator's digital delivery complicated processes and contributed to a complex user experience. It states that scheme design elements were informed by previous learnings and focused on quality assurance.
HM Treasury
View Details
10 Conclusion Acknowledged
Industry associations stated that the short lead up time, and the Scheme’s six-month window was...
Conclusion
Industry associations stated that the short lead up time, and the Scheme’s six-month window was a challenge for many installers, providing a very short timeframe for them to identify the resources they needed to engage with the scheme, as well … Read more
Government Response Summary
The government recognises the impact of the shortened timescale and digital delivery on installer engagement, stating that policy implementation will be improved through robust public consultation and by sharing lessons learned for future schemes.
HM Treasury
View Details
11 Conclusion Acknowledged
Requiring PAS and MCS certification, alongside Trustmark registration, was intended to protect homeowners from poor...
Conclusion
Requiring PAS and MCS certification, alongside Trustmark registration, was intended to protect homeowners from poor quality workmanship and fraud.29 However, gaining these certifications requires investment and time, which many installers were unwilling to do for only a 6-month scheme.30 At … Read more
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledges the impact of shortened timescales and complex digital delivery on installer engagement. It reaffirms commitment to high quality standards based on the EHC review and states that lessons learned from the scheme will inform future policy development and implementation, including robust public consultation.
HM Treasury
View Details
12 Conclusion Acknowledged
Whilst the Department extended the scheme’s duration by 12 months in November 2020, it later...
Conclusion
Whilst the Department extended the scheme’s duration by 12 months in November 2020, it later let these businesses down when on 27 March 2021 it suddenly announced the Scheme would close at the end of 31 March 2021.35 This abrupt … Read more
Government Response Summary
The government recognises the negative impact of the shortened timescale and abrupt scheme closure on stakeholders, stating that policy implementation can be improved through robust public consultation and by sharing lessons learned for future schemes.
HM Treasury
View Details
13 Conclusion Acknowledged
The Department acknowledged that the impact on many installers was less than ideal, however, it...
Conclusion
The Department acknowledged that the impact on many installers was less than ideal, however, it stated that the alternative was to continue running an unacceptable standard of service.37 It also argued that installers would be able to access the other … Read more
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledges the impact of shortened timescales and states that policy implementation will be improved through robust public consultation and sharing lessons learned for future schemes, but does not directly address the contradiction regarding the viability of alternative schemes for SMEs.
HM Treasury
View Details
17 Conclusion Acknowledged
In 2016 our predecessors on the Committee identified similar problems when they examined the Green...
Conclusion
In 2016 our predecessors on the Committee identified similar problems when they examined the Green Deal; in that case the former Department for Energy and Climate did not undertake enough work to understand consumer needs, and how to make it … Read more
Government Response Summary
The government agrees with the committee's implied recommendation to learn from past scheme failures, stating it is 'implemented'. The response details processes for extracting and sharing lessons learned from the GHGv scheme through independent evaluation, internal briefings, cross-Whitehall cascades, and a new programme to transform the department's delivery capability for future projects.
HM Treasury
View Details
20 Recommendation Acknowledged
The Department’s previous energy efficiency schemes for private housing have operated in different ways, and...
Recommendation
The Department’s previous energy efficiency schemes for private housing have operated in different ways, and for varying timescales, and this fragmented, stop-go activity has hindered long term stable progress towards Government’s energy efficiency ambitions. In evidence to us industry associations … Read more
Government Response Summary
The government agrees with the recommendation for a stable long-term plan, stating it is 'implemented' by the Heat and Buildings Strategy. The response outlines a commitment to applying lessons learned from the GHGv scheme through an independent evaluation, internal briefings, cross-Whitehall cascades, and a new programme to transform departmental delivery capability for future projects.
HM Treasury
View Details
21 Conclusion Acknowledged
The Chancellor announced the Green Homes Grant Voucher Scheme (the Scheme) on the 8 July...
Conclusion
The Chancellor announced the Green Homes Grant Voucher Scheme (the Scheme) on the 8 July 2020, with the expectation that it would launch on 30 September 2020. This allowed just 12 weeks to get the scheme up and running. During … Read more
Government Response Summary
The government recognises the impact of the shortened timescale and the scheme administrator's digital delivery complications. It commits to improving policy implementation through robust public consultation and sharing lessons learned from the GHGv scheme to inform future policy development.
HM Treasury
View Details
22 Conclusion Acknowledged
The Department told us that it had a high-risk appetite in getting the scheme up...
Conclusion
The Department told us that it had a high-risk appetite in getting the scheme up and running due to the ongoing effects of the pandemic, and the short 12-week timescale was necessary to boost jobs as 60% of the construction … Read more
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledges the negative impact of the shortened timescale for the scheme and states it aims to improve policy implementation through robust public consultation and by sharing lessons learned for future schemes.
HM Treasury
View Details
23 Conclusion Acknowledged
This rushed timescale meant that the Department undertook limited stakeholder engagement and restricted its options...
Conclusion
This rushed timescale meant that the Department undertook limited stakeholder engagement and restricted its options for procuring an administrator.64 The Department also did not pilot the scheme to test its feasibility.65 These issues led to many of the problems described … Read more
Government Response Summary
The government recognises the negative impact of the rushed timescale and limited stakeholder engagement on the scheme's delivery, stating that policy implementation will improve through robust public consultations and sharing lessons learned for future schemes.
HM Treasury
View Details