The review assessed if Bracknell Forest is delivering an effective social and affordable housing system that is capable of meeting local demand.
The panel aimed to develop recommendations that would strengthen partnership working. We also want to encourage curiosity and learning around innovative and alternative delivery models.
Above all, we want to improve the experience of residents who interact with the social and affordable housing system in Bracknell Forest.
“The Environment and Communities Overview and Scrutiny Panel chose to undertake this review to gain an understanding of how the social and affordable housing system operates in Bracknell Forest, and whether the different parts of this system effectively work together. The panel looked beyond individual services or organisations and focused on how residents experience the system as a whole.
Our intention has been to make sure that this review leads to meaningful improvements to social and affordable housing for residents. In particular, the panel hopes that this work will support clearer communication, increased access to housing and stronger partnership working, helping residents to feel better informed and more confident when engaging with the housing system.
As a result of this review, the panel has made 8 recommendations aimed at strengthening how the social and affordable housing system functions in Bracknell Forest. In addition, the panel has made 2 further recommendations following its review of progress against the recommendations agreed after the panel’s previous scrutiny review of Registered Social Landlords in April 2021. These additional recommendations are intended to make sure that earlier commitments continue to deliver intended benefits for residents.
One of the standout moments of the review was the evidence session with Keith House, Leader of Eastleigh Borough Council. His contribution provided a clear and practical insight into alternative approaches to housing delivery and offered valuable learning for the panel as it considered how different models may support local ambitions in the future. I would like to thank Councillor House for giving his time and sharing Eastleigh’s experience so openly.
I would also like to thank everyone who contributed to this review, including council officers, residents, developers, registered providers and other partners. The quality of evidence received and willingness to engage constructively played a vital role in shaping the panel’s findings and recommendations.
Finally, I would like to thank my fellow panel members for their commitment and thoughtful challenge throughout the review. In particular, I wish to thank the Vice Chair, Councillor Mike Forster, for the significant support he provided and for the leadership he showed in guiding the panel’s work at every stage.”
Councillor Christoph Eberle – Chair of the Environment and Communities Overview and Scrutiny Panel.
Review Section 2.3.3 of the Housing Allocations Policy (PDF, 0.94MB), which sets out how housing related debt can be a barrier to accessing social and affordable housing.
This is to make sure it remains fair and proportionate, particularly where debt arises from domestic abuse or coercive control, and to make sure that discretion is applied consistently.
Unify cabinet member portfolios relating to social and affordable housing. This is to make sure that 1 cabinet member has clear, end to end strategic responsibility and accountability for social and affordable housing delivery in Bracknell Forest.
Simplify social and affordable housing communications sent to residents by bringing all written content in line with the Government’s writing for GOV.UK guide.
Co-produce templates with registered providers to make sure they are clear and accessible.
Strengthen engagement with developers and registered providers on the delivery of social and affordable housing by:
Hold a workshop with Eastleigh Borough Council for Cabinet and senior officer leadership. This will help them to understand their approach to council led social and affordable housing delivery and consider its relevance for Bracknell Forest.
Investigate innovative schemes that broaden access to social and affordable housing. We will get insight from organisations such as Shelter and the Local Government Association to identify best practice used elsewhere.
Explore opportunities to secure additional funding from Homes England and other national programmes. This can help increase the supply of social and affordable housing in the borough.
Improve tenant education on damp and mould in social and affordable housing.
We will also work with registered providers to address other sources of damp, such as:
Recommendations from the 2021 review were to:
Across the UK, demand for social and affordable housing is greater than the number of homes available.
House prices and private rents have increased, making it harder for many people to find housing they can afford. At the same time, councils, registered providers and developers face higher expectations around building safety, quality and long term management.
Local authorities must:
Bracknell Forest faces many of the same challenges. Rising house prices mean home ownership is out of reach for many residents. Private rents are also high, and the private rented sector is relatively small. This limits the housing options available to households who cannot buy or afford private rents.
Bracknell Forest Council does not own long term social housing. Instead, it relies on registered providers to supply social and affordable homes. The council secures access to these homes mainly through nomination agreements and through affordable housing delivered as part of new developments. Demand for social and affordable housing remains high.
In December 2025 the average house price in Bracknell Forest was £399,000.
In April 2025, 1,479 households were on the housing register. There was strong demand for both smaller homes and larger family housing.
The supply of new social and affordable housing is affected by:
The Local Plan requires 35% affordable housing on certain developments, based on identified local need. However, the number of affordable homes delivered varies depending on:
Pressure on housing supply also affects homelessness. Increased demand means:
Evidence shared with the panel showed that local homelessness services manage these pressures effectively. However, the underlying causes reflect wider national housing problems rather than issues unique to Bracknell Forest.
| Region | 2021 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Bracknell Forest | 3.64 | 2.86 |
| West Berkshire | 0.56 | 2.24 |
| Slough | 7.04 | 24.80 |
| South East | 2.69 | 4.04 |
| England | 4.03 | 5.43 |
Against this background, this review examined the performance of the social and affordable housing system in Bracknell Forest. The review looked at:
The panel carried out the review using 4 modules:
Understanding the effectiveness of the current social and affordable housing system.
Understanding the role of developers in delivering social and affordable housing.
Assessing if registered providers provide adequate social and affordable housing for a variety of residents.
Exploring alternative models of delivering social and affordable housing.
Each module received evidence on a specific theme to build a clear picture of how the social and affordable housing system works.
This approach helped shape the panel’s understanding of each component of the system sequentially before reaching its findings and subsequent recommendations.
| Name | Organisation | Role | Scope of evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brian Daly | Bracknell Forest Council | Head of Housing | Explained the council’s housing duties, allocations process and demand pressures |
| Ian Stone | Bracknell Forest Council | Housing Strategy and Enabling Projects Manager | Summarised how affordable housing is delivered through planning, S106 and Homes England funding and outlined the upcoming homelessness strategy refresh |
Module 1 outlined the council’s role in the provision of social and affordable housing in Bracknell Forest. Housing officers explained how the council meets its legal duties. This included:
The panel acknowledged that Bracknell Forest Council does not own any long term social housing. It relies on nomination agreements with registered providers to house residents. The main provider in the borough is Abri.
Over 7,500
social and affordable homes in the borough are owned and managed by Abri.
Officers also explained the pressures created by the local housing market. Demand for social and affordable housing remains high, while the supply of larger family homes is limited.
Data showed that most affordable homes delivered in recent years have been 1 or 2 bedroom properties. In contrast, very few 3 or 4 bedroom homes become available each year. This leads to long waiting times for families.
The panel acknowledged how the council supports affordable housing delivery through its enabling role and through Section 106 planning agreements. It also acknowledged how development costs and market conditions affect the number, size and type of homes that can be delivered.
| Year | 1 bed | 2 bed | 3 bed | 4 bed | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 to 2020 | 41 | 53 | 12 | 0 | 106 |
| 2020 to 2021 | 17 | 32 | 4 | 0 | 53 |
| 2021 to 2022 | 23 | 48 | 8 | 1 | 80 |
| 2022 to 2023 | 10 | 17 | 6 | 0 | 33 |
| 2023 to 2024 | 58 | 55 | 4 | 0 | 117 |
| 2024 to 2025 | 13 | 9 | 8 | 0 | 30 |
| Total | 162 | 214 | 42 | 1 | 419 |
The panel reviewed how the Housing Allocations Policy operates in practice. This included:
Officers confirmed that the revised policy will be reviewed after 12 months to understand its impact.
In reviewing the Housing Strategy 2023 to 2028 (PDF, 0.58MB), the panel noted that it sets out clear priorities but would benefit from a mid term update to reflect changes in national policy and legislation.
The panel also considered the Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Strategy 2021 to 2026 (PDF, 2.0 MB). Evidence showed that levels of rough sleeping remain relatively low, reflecting proactive outreach and partnership working. The panel heard that a planned refresh of the strategy, including a homelessness review, was already underway.
| Year | Number of people |
|---|---|
| 2024 | 10 |
| 2025 | 6* |
*As of January 2026, only 1 of the 6 people found to be sleeping rough at the official count in November 2025 was still doing so.
Finally, the panel reviewed progress against the recommendations from the 2021 scrutiny review of Registered Social Landlords (RSLs) (PDF, 0.5MB). This allowed members to identify:
| Previous recommendation (2021) | Progress | Panel position |
|---|---|---|
| Commission member development training on community leadership in social housing, including RSL governance and environmental health enforcement. | Training was cancelled in 2021 and not rescheduled. Members identified an ongoing need for better insight into stock conditions, damp and mould cases, and ward level information. | Further work required |
| Establish quarterly all member briefings with Housing and the PPP. | Only 1 briefing of this type has taken place since 2021. | Further work required |
| Provide website information on what tenants should expect from landlords. | This was completed. Officers undertook a light touch review to make sure the information remained accurate and up to date. | Completed |
| Engage registered providers’ digital teams to explore aligned digital transformation and shared systems. | Digital integration with registered providers is not practical. | Retired |
| Write to government supporting stronger consumer regulation in social housing. | Subsequent legislation has overtaken this recommendation. The issues are being addressed through the Social Housing (Regulation) Act, local monitoring and the recommendations in this report. | Addressed through recommendations in this report |
On reviewing the recommendations from the 2021 RSL review, the panel determined the first and second recommendations remained incomplete. It would be beneficial for residents if further recommendations were made to take them forward.
We have used SMART targets to communicate our recommendations. This means our recommendations are:
The council should ensure that:
This work can be delivered through collaboration between:
Requirements will be formalised through existing and updated service level agreements.
These actions will:
All elements will be implemented by the end of quarter 3 of 2026 to 2027.
The council should establish quarterly joint briefings for all councillors on social and affordable housing.
These sessions, delivered collaboratively by the housing service and the PPP, should provide updates on:
Four briefings will be delivered each year, with councillor attendance recorded.
The sessions can be delivered within existing service structures.
The briefings will support informed scrutiny and strengthen oversight of stock condition and enforcement.
The first briefing will take place by the end of quarter 2 of 2026 to 2027.
| Name | Organisation | Job title | Why they were invited |
|---|---|---|---|
| Andy Pennell | Cala Homes | Affordable Housing Director | Explained developer perspectives on affordable housing viability, Section 106 delivery and current market constraints. |
| Jo Male | Bracknell Forest Council | Assistant Director: Planning | Explained how planning policy and viability affect affordable housing delivery. |
In module 2, the panel heard evidence from the council’s Assistant Director for Planning and from the Affordable Housing Director at Cala Homes. This gave the panel both a local planning view and a developer’s view of how the social and affordable housing system is working.
This module helped the panel understand the interaction between:
By highlighting the structural challenges that currently limit affordable housing delivery in Bracknell Forest, the module underlined the importance of strong partnership working between the council, developers and registered providers.
The panel were informed that the delivery of affordable housing in Bracknell Forest is shaped by 2 main factors. These are:
Planning policy requires 35% affordable housing on qualifying developments. However, the number of affordable homes that can be delivered on any site depends on site specific factors, such as:
As a result of these factors, social and affordable housing delivery varies across the borough. Not all sites are able to meet the full policy requirement.
The panel also gained a clearer understanding of wider national pressures affecting the social and affordable housing market. Many registered providers are currently using their resources to improve and maintain existing homes, particularly to address damp, mould and building safety issues.
This has reduced their ability to purchase new affordable homes through Section 106 agreements. Fewer providers coming forward to take on these homes affects both the viability of developments and the overall supply of new affordable housing.
From the developer’s perspective, the panel heard that early engagement with registered providers is essential in deciding if a development can support affordable housing. However, reduced provider appetite and rising construction costs have made developments harder to balance financially.
Despite these challenges, developers confirmed that affordable homes are built to the same external standards as private homes, because of tenure blind design requirements. They also stressed their continued commitment to delivering the affordable homes secured through Section 106 agreements.
| Name | Organisation | Job title | Scope of evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tom Mason | Abri | Regional Assistant Director | Described Abri’s local housing operations, including repairs, improvements and issues. |
| Sam Stone | Abri | Director of Land and Planning | Outlined Abri’s development pipeline, S106 and viability pressures, and upcoming schemes in Bracknell Forest. |
In module 3, the panel heard evidence from senior representatives of Abri, the borough’s largest registered provider of social and affordable housing. This helped the panel understand how well registered providers meet the needs of different groups of residents, and how their capacity and operating environment affect the overall effectiveness of the local housing system.
This module enabled the panel to assess how well the social and affordable housing system is working. It highlighted both the pressures registered providers face and the steps they are taking to improve the quality, suitability and management of homes. While significant challenges remain, registered providers continue to play a central role in providing safe, appropriate and well managed housing for a diverse range of residents.
The panel were informed that registered providers have faced significant national pressures. Providers' ability to take on new developments has been limited by:
As noted by the developer witness in module 2, many registered providers have been reluctant to take section 106 agreements. This has reduced the supply of new social and affordable housing locally. Abri advised that these pressures are starting to ease, and that it intends to re-enter the section 106 market as conditions improve. This helped the panel understand why delivery has not kept pace with identified housing need, despite strong planning policy.
The panel also gained a clearer understanding of how registered providers decide if the homes they provide meet the needs of different residents. Where Abri directly controls a development, it is better able to respond to local demand. This includes:
Abri representatives explained that new national grant programmes are expected to support a shift towards more social rent homes. This would particularly benefit households who cannot afford affordable rent or shared ownership housing.
When the panel considered the condition and suitability of existing homes, it was told that the merger between Silva and Abri has strengthened Abri’s ability to manage and maintain its housing stock. Evidence showed that repair backlogs have reduced and that additional investment has been made in insulation, heating upgrades and other energy efficiency improvements. This helps to make sure homes remain safe, warm and suitable for a wide range of residents.
The panel also heard that overall stock management has improved since the merger. At the point of merger, around 100 properties previously managed by Silva were standing empty. Within a few months, this number had been reduced to around 15 vacant homes, which is considered a normal and manageable level as tenants move in and out of properties. This improvement reflects faster letting times and stronger operational capacity.
However, the panel also heard that some older estates continue to face ongoing challenges that can affect residents' experience. This included:
Abri set out plans to address these through targeted estate improvements.
The panel also considered how effectively registered providers communicate with residents. While overall satisfaction with repairs is high, communication was consistently raised as an area of concern. Residents reported that written information can be difficult to understand due to its volume, language and tone. Abri confirmed that work was underway to improve communication, supported by resident led scrutiny.
| Name | Organisation | Role | Scope of evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Councillor Keith House | Eastleigh Borough Council | Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Planning and Property | Provided insight into Eastleigh’s council-led housing delivery model and how proactive intervention can increase housing supply. |
Module 4 allowed the panel to explore if Bracknell Forest’s approach to social and affordable housing could be strengthened by looking at different delivery models used elsewhere. The panel heard evidence from the Leader of Eastleigh Borough Council, Keith House, who explained how Eastleigh had taken an extremely pro-active approach to housing delivery. This approach is designed to work alongside developers and registered providers, rather than replace them.
Module 4 broadened the panel’s understanding of how a local authority can support housing delivery alongside the market and registered providers. The method adopted by Eastleigh is just 1 method of delivering an effective social and affordable housing system. The evidence helped the panel consider if elements of more interventionist approaches could support Bracknell Forest Council’s long term aim to improve the effectiveness, resilience and range of its social and affordable housing system.
Eastleigh’s model was based on the idea that councils can step in directly where the market is not delivering the right mix of homes. This approach includes:
This evidence to the panel illustrated a proactive approach which has the potential to speed up delivery or unlock sites that would otherwise not progress. This approach could sit alongside Bracknell Forest’s existing planning and enabling role.
Examples of the Eastleigh approach included their One Horton Heath scheme. This was highlighted as a large scale, council led development. The project includes almost 3,000 homes alongside early delivery of:
The council uses a mixed tenure approach, often aiming for a balance of market sale, market rent and social or affordable rent homes. Income from market housing helps subsidise lower cost homes and supports the scheme’s long term financial sustainability. The panel also heard about smaller scale approaches, such as:
The panel also considered a range of innovative tenancy schemes used by Eastleigh to improve affordability and widen access to housing. These include:
Eastleigh also shared evidence of its market rent portfolio, which has low tenant turnover and low rent arrears. The income from this portfolio is reinvested to support additional social and affordable housing delivery.
Together, these examples showed how alternative tenancy models can offer secure and affordable housing options beyond traditional social rent.
| Year | Number of homes |
|---|---|
| 2023 to 2024 | 1,166 |
| 2024 to 2025 | 1,426 |
Environmental sustainability was at the centre of Eastleigh’s approach. The council has committed to removing gas from new developments and instead uses air and ground source heat pumps.
Developments also:
These examples helped the panel consider how higher environmental standards could be built into social and affordable housing at scale.
Eastleigh built their social and affordable house internal capability gradually. It started with small schemes, recruited specialist staff and developed commercial and delivery expertise over time. This highlighted that council led housing requires the right skills, strong governance and clear political support.
Eastleigh also stressed the importance of strong business cases, careful management of long term borrowing and a focus on financial prudence. This demonstrates that more active approaches can be taken without placing undue risk on council finances.
The panel followed up with Abri to solicit their view on a more strategic social and affordable housing strategy and the implications for Bracknell Forest.
Abri’s experience with a housing focused authority like Eastleigh DC has been positive. Having a well-defined housing strategy that aligns closely with our aims helps to progress schemes. The benefits of having clear housing priorities, proactive officers and a streamlined decision-making process makes partnership work easier. There is a willingness to explore flexible solutions when challenges arise.
One area to be mindful of is that high ambition levels can create a pressure on deliverability if market or operational conditions change. For Bracknell Forest, the key advice is to make sure there is cross department alignment. We must maintain open, early communication so partners can plan confidently and work together to solve issues.
| Name | Organisation | Role | Scope of evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Councillor Helen Purnell | Bracknell Forest Council | Cabinet Member for the Environment, Community and Housing at the time of the review (now Leader of the Council, Cabinet Member for Council Strategy and Communities) | Set out the council’s political priorities for housing, the strategic challenges in meeting local demand and the actions being taken through policy, partnerships and investment to improve housing outcomes. |
As part of the review, the panel met with the Cabinet Member responsible for housing policy in Bracknell Forest at the time, Councillor Helen Purnell, then Cabinet Member for the Environment, Community and Housing (now Leader of the Council).
The Cabinet member confirmed her view that the council’s overall approach to social and affordable housing is broadly fit for purpose. She highlighted strong performance in preventing homelessness as a particular area of success.
She emphasised that the main challenge facing the borough is the shortage of available social and affordable homes. This has led to long waiting times, especially for larger family homes. She identified the Joint Venture Board as the council’s most effective tool for increasing the supply of housing and noted positive progress on schemes such as Cooper’s Hill.
| Joint Venture scheme | Status | Total homes | Affordable homes | Shared ownership | Affordable rent | Social rent |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coopers Hill | Completed | 52 | 13 | 5 | 8 | 0 |
| Market Street | Under construction | 169 | 81 | 29 | 0 | 52 |
Councillor Purnell also identified a number of areas where further improvement is needed. These include:
She also confirmed that she is open to exploring other methods of housing delivery in the future. She recognised that this would require significant capital investment and the council opening a housing revenue account.
During the review, the panel identified areas where strong or improving practice is already in place within Bracknell Forest and among its partners.
Evidence from officers and the Cabinet Member showed that homelessness prevention services are working well. Levels of rough sleeping remain relatively low compared to national trends, supported by:
Although the council does not own social housing, it makes effective use of nomination agreements with registered providers to secure homes for residents.
Evidence showed that these arrangements allow the council to prioritise households based on need and make sure available homes are allocated fairly.
The panel heard consistent evidence of a strong and well established working relationship between the council and Abri. This partnership supports:
Evidence from Abri showed that the merger with Silva has strengthened capacity and resilience. The panel heard that this has helped:
The panel received evidence that repairs and void management have improved significantly. Abri reported:
The use of in house repair teams was highlighted as supporting faster responses and better quality control.
The panel heard examples where affordable housing delivery has gone beyond minimum requirements. This includes:
Registered providers described proactive work to improve housing quality, including:
The panel noted that this reflects both national regulatory requirements and a commitment to improving residents’ living conditions.
The panel has developed a set of recommendations after considering evidence from:
The panel recognises that the social and affordable housing system is under significant pressure nationally. However, it also found clear areas where action at a local level could strengthen how the system operates and deliver clear benefits for residents.
The recommendations that follow are intended to improve fairness, transparency and partnership working. They aim to support both the delivery and quality of social and affordable housing, and to make sure residents are better informed and supported when using the housing system.
The panel has designed the recommendations to be practical, proportionate and achievable within the council’s existing governance and resources. They also allow the council to take forward opportunities to improve outcomes for current and future residents.
Full recommendation: Review section 2.3.3 of the Housing Allocations Policy, which sets out how housing related debt can be a barrier to accessing social and affordable housing, to make sure it remains fair and proportionate - particularly where debt arises from domestic abuse or coercive control - and that discretion is applied consistently.
The panel heard that the current approach to housing related debt can prevent some applicants from accessing social and affordable housing. Evidence from module 1 and the Cabinet Member meeting highlighted concerns that this approach may have a greater impact on residents whose debt has arisen because of domestic abuse or coercive control.
The panel considered this issue alongside the Housing Allocations Policy and concluded that discretion needs to be applied clearly and consistently. This is intended to make sure that vulnerable residents are not unfairly excluded from housing because of circumstances outside their control, and that decisions about access to social and affordable housing are fair and proportionate.
Responsibility for this work sits with the Cabinet Member for Housing and Communication, supported by housing officers.
1.1 - The Cabinet Member will review section 2.3.3 of the Housing Allocations Policy to assess if sufficient discretion is available where housing related debt is linked to domestic abuse, coercive control or similar exploitation, and identify any amendments required.
A written report setting out the findings of the review and any proposed changes should be provided to the panel.
The review can be progressed within existing officer capacity and the Cabinet Member’s remit.
Makes sure there is equitable access to social and affordable housing for vulnerable residents.
Review to be completed by the end of quarter 2 of 2026 to 2027.
The panel considered evidence showing that responsibility for different parts of the social and affordable housing system is currently spread across several Cabinet portfolios. Evidence from the Cabinet Member session and from wider scrutiny suggested that this can make it harder to provide clear strategic leadership.
The panel concluded that clearer end to end accountability could improve oversight, coordination and decision making. This recommendation therefore looks at if bringing the relevant Cabinet responsibilities together under a single portfolio would strengthen leadership of the housing system.
For residents, clearer accountability is expected to lead to a more joined up and responsive approach to social and affordable housing.
2.1 - A cabinet review should be commissioned to assess options for consolidating cabinet member responsibilities so that 1 member holds end to end strategic oversight of social and affordable housing.
Completion of the review and reporting of its conclusions to the panel.
The Leader has authority to review and amend Cabinet portfolios if appropriate.
Improved accountability and clarity should support more effective service delivery.
Review to be completed by the end of quarter 2 of 2026 to 2027.
Full recommendation: Simplify communications sent to residents about social and affordable housing by bringing all written content in line with the government’s plain English guidance. To co-produce templates with registered providers to make sure they are clear and accessible.
Residents, panel members and the Cabinet Member told the panel that information about social and affordable housing can be hard to understand. They highlighted the use of complex language and inconsistent messages between the council and registered providers.
The panel concluded that clearer and more consistent communication is essential if residents are to understand their housing options, as well as their rights and responsibilities. Working with registered providers to co-produce plain language templates will help reduce confusion and make information more accessible.
The Cabinet Member for Housing and Communication should lead this work, with support from housing and communications officers.
3.1 - All housing related correspondence and website content will be reviewed and updated to align with the government’s Plain English guidance, with templates co-produced alongside registered providers.
We will:
Work can be delivered using existing staff resources and established provider relationships.
Clearer communication improves resident understanding, confidence and engagement with the housing system.
Work to be completed by quarter 3 of 2026 to 2027.
Evidence from developers and registered providers highlighted the pressures currently affecting the delivery of social and affordable housing. These include:
Abri explained that well defined housing strategy that is aligned with partners’ aims helps to progress schemes more effectively. Clear priorities, proactive officers and streamlined decision making processes all make partnership working easier. There is a willingness to explore flexible solutions when challenges arise.
However, Abri also cautioned that high ambition levels can create pressure on deliverability if market or operational conditions change. For Bracknell Forest, their advice was to make sure there was strong cross departmental alignment and maintain open, early communication so that partners can plan confidently and work collaboratively to resolve issues.
For residents, stronger engagement and more coordinated leadership is expected to support more consistent delivery of new homes that meet the specific needs of the borough. The Cabinet Member for Housing and Communication should lead this work, supported by cabinet colleagues and officers across planning and housing.
4.1 - Regular liaison meetings should be re established between the council, registered providers and key developers. Strategic issues will be escalated through Berkshire wide forums where appropriate.
Meetings will be held and documented, with attendance and outcomes reported to the panel.
Builds on existing relationships and does not require additional governance structures.
Supports the delivery of social and affordable housing in line with Local Plan objectives.
First meeting to take place by the end of quarter 2 of 2026 to 2027.
To understand if Bracknell Forest’s current approach to housing delivery is working as well as it could, the panel considered alternative delivery models, including council led housing. Evidence from Eastleigh Borough Council showed how local authorities can support housing delivery alongside the market by:
The panel concluded that a focused workshop would allow cabinet members and senior officers to explore if elements of this approach could be adapted and used locally in Bracknell Forest.
Responsibility for this work sits with the Cabinet Member for Housing and Communication, working with the Leader of the Council and senior officers.
5.1 - A workshop should be held with Eastleigh Borough Council for cabinet members and senior officers to examine their council led housing model and identify potential areas of relevance.
Delivery of the workshop and a summary of learning and agreed follow up actions reported to the panel.
Previous engagement has established willingness to support such discussions.
Supports informed consideration of alternative methods for delivering social and affordable housing.
Workshop to be held by the end of quarter 3 pf 2026 to 2027.
The panel considered a range of innovative approaches that could help widen access to social and affordable housing. These included:
To understand if these approaches could benefit local residents, the panel concluded that a structured feasibility assessment is needed. While the council cannot introduce these schemes on its own, this work would help identify if alternative tenancy options are workable and if they could support greater stability, affordability and progression towards home ownership in Bracknell Forest.
The Cabinet Member for Housing and Communication should oversee this work, supported by housing officers. Once a report has been produced, the panel will consider if any further recommendations are needed.
6.1 - A feasibility study will be conducted on innovative tenancy models, drawing on best practice from organisations such as Shelter and the Local Government Association, as well as other local authorities. It will consider financial, operational and social impacts.
Presentation of a written report to the panel outlining options, risks and recommendations.
Can be delivered within existing officer capacity with partner input.
Broadens access to social and affordable housing and supports tenant choice and progression.
Study to be completed by the end of quarter 3 of 2026 to 2027.
The panel heard that external funding, particularly from organisations such as Homes England, can play an important role in increasing the supply of social and affordable housing and supporting the delivery of schemes. Such funding can also help improve scheme viability and enable progress on complex developments.
The panel considered that undertaking a focused piece of work to identify and pursue relevant funding opportunities would be beneficial. For residents, this offers the potential for additional housing supply, improved quality and faster delivery of new homes where funding can be secured.
Responsibility for this work sits with the Cabinet Member for Housing and Communication, supported by housing officers.
7.1 - Officers will identify relevant Homes England and national funding programmes. They will pursue opportunities aligned with the council’s housing strategy.
An initial report will set out funding opportunities explored, applications submitted and outcomes achieved.
Builds on existing engagement with Homes England and funding bodies.
Additional funding directly supports increased delivery of social and affordable housing.
Initial report to be provided by the end of quarter 2 of 2026 to 2027.
Evidence from residents, registered providers and the Cabinet Member highlighted ongoing concerns about damp and mould in social and affordable housing. Wider building related issues were also raised, including problems with:
While recent changes in legislation, such as Awaab’s Law, have strengthened landlords’ responsibilities, the panel heard that residents would benefit from clearer information on how to identify issues early and how to report them promptly. The panel considered that a co-produced education and engagement campaign would support earlier action and help improve the quality of homes.
The Cabinet Member for Housing and Communication will lead this work, working with:
8.1 - A multi channel education campaign will be developed with registered providers to inform tenants about damp and mould prevention, reporting routes and landlords’ responsibilities. This is alongside joint action to address building related sources of damp.
Campaign materials produced and distributed, with engagement levels monitored and reported.
Can be delivered through existing communication channels and provider partnerships.
Improves health outcomes, housing quality and resident confidence in the social and affordable housing system.
Campaign to be launched by quarter 3 of 2026 to 2027.
During its consideration of the report and recommendations, the panel also discussed the issue of parking provision for social and affordable housing in older areas of the borough.
The panel noted that this is an area it may wish to review in the future.
There are no immediate financial commitments arising from adopting the recommendations within this report, with much being delivered largely from within existing resources.
Work to explore innovative tenancy options and external funding routes (for example Homes England) may identify opportunities with future financial implications.
Any proposal that requires new investment (capital or revenue), on-going commitments or match funding will return through the council’s standard budget, procurement and governance processes for full appraisal and approval.
| Name | Organisation | Job title |
|---|---|---|
| Brian Daly | Bracknell Forest Council | Head of Housing |
| Ian Stone | Bracknell Forest Council | Housing Strategy and Enabling Projects Manager |
| Harry Rigg | Bracknell Forest Council | Corporate Complaints and Scrutiny Officer |
| Jo Male | Bracknell Forest Council | Assistant Director: Planning |
| Andy Pennell | Cala Homes | Affordable Housing Director |
| Sue Scott | Bracknell Forest Council | Team Manager – Development Plan |
| Councillor Keith House | Eastleigh Borough Council | Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Planning and Property |
| Tom Mason | Abri | Regional Assistant Director |
| Sam Stone | Abri | Director of Land and Planning |
| Councillor Helen Purnell | Bracknell Forest Council | Cabinet Member for the Environment, Community and Housing (Deputy Leader and Vice-chair of the Cabinet) at the time of the review. (Now Leader of the Council) |
