Research and analysis

Executive Summary

Published 10 September 2026

1. Focus and Method

The Local Full Fibre Networks (LFFN) programme, launched by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport in 2017, was a £200 million programme designed to accelerate the deployment of full-fibre and gigabit-capable broadband at a time when national coverage was still limited and uneven. The programme sought to improve connectivity for public-sector organisations, extend access to high-quality digital infrastructure for residents and businesses, and stimulate wider investment in full-fibre networks by providing funding for local authority led projects to connect public sector buildings and assets, which in turn would reduce the costs and risks associated with early deployment. By using public-sector connectivity as a catalyst, LFFN aimed to generate local benefits while also supporting long-term improvements in digital capability and economic resilience.

This report presents the findings of work package one of the LFFN evaluation, being conducted by GC Insight, Belmana and Darren Kilburn. Work package one examines how the LFFN programme has influenced local and national broadband markets, with a focus on supplier entry and expansion, competition and consumer choice, affordability, and wider market effects.

The findings are based primarily on detailed case study evidence, supported by a desk-based review of programme documentation, market data, and interviews with suppliers. A contribution analysis approach is used to assess the role LFFN played alongside wider market forces, recognising the limits of attribution in a rapidly evolving market.

The case studies were selected to represent a range of different delivery models, geographies and suppliers. They include:

• Cooperative Network Infrastructure (CNI) – Focuses on Blackpool and Mid Sussex, where LFFN funded shared infrastructure delivered through the Cooperative Network Infrastructure model, and has been used by alt-nets.

• CityFibre – includes 5 areas where CityFibre (one of the largest alt-nets) won LFFN contracts or used LFFN funded infrastructure (Cambridge, Highlands, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Wolverhampton)

• Northern Ireland – Covers 3 LFFN projects (Armagh, Banbridge and Craigavon; Belfast; and Full Fibre Northern Ireland), which were delivered by a mix of alt-nets and incumbents

• Tay Cities – Examines 2 LFFN projects in Perth and Kinross, one of which was delivered by Openreach, an incumbent operator.

2. Market impacts: Key findings

This section summarises the market impacts identified through work package one, drawing on evidence from the case studies and supporting analysis. It highlights where the evidence is strongest, where findings are mixed, and where there is limited evidence of market effects. Across all case studies, the nature and scale of impacts were shaped by local market conditions, delivery models, and the role that LFFN played alongside wider commercial activity.

2.1 Supplier entry and expansion

LFFN enabled new suppliers to enter some local broadband markets and helped accelerate deployment in others. Its influence varied by location and supplier. LFFN was most effective where it reduced risks or addressed key barriers to entry. In other locations suppliers were already growing their networks, but LFFN played a supportive role by enabling faster or slightly wider deployment. Across all areas, private investment remained the primary driver of supplier expansion.

• CityFibre case study areas – LFFN provided the funding needed to unlock anchor tenancy projects in several areas (Highlands, Portsmouth, Suffolk and Wolverhampton). This addressed a key barrier, enabling CityFibre to enter these markets far earlier than would otherwise have been possible.

• CNI (Blackpool, Mid Sussex) – Access to LFFN-funded CNI infrastructure substantially reduced upfront costs for new broadband suppliers. This was a decisive factor in ITS’s entry into the Blackpool market and accelerated CityFibre’s entry. F&W Networks had already committed to entering the Mid Sussex market for commercial reasons, but access to CNI infrastructure helped them expand further and faster.

• Northern Ireland – Fibrus and Openreach were already expanding coverage of their fibre networks prior to LFFN, however the programme enabled modest extensions to planned coverage around public-sector sites.

• Tay Cities – Openreach was already expanding in the LFFN areas, but the contract accelerated rollout in some locations and may have enabled limited additional coverage. Neos Networks also had an existing presence in Perth, with LFFN enabling modest further network expansion.

2.2 Supplier growth, capability and resilience

The evidence indicates that LFFN delivered enabling benefits for supplier growth and capability, with these effects most evident for CityFibre and Fibrus. For CityFibre, LFFN contributed both directly and indirectly to growth. It is estimated that LFFN-enabled connections account for around 10% of the company’s annual revenues, and the programme also helped CityFibre build a track record of delivering large-scale public sector contracts, supporting its ability to secure larger contracts through Project Gigabit.

Similarly, the Full Fibre Northern Ireland project gave Fibrus practical experience of delivering a major publicly funded broadband programme, strengthening its technical capability, organisational capacity, and credibility with public sector clients. This supported the company in winning a further major contract from the Northern Ireland government (Project Stratum) and a Project Gigabit contract in Cumbria.

While private investment and wider market conditions were more substantial drivers of growth, the evidence suggests that LFFN played a credible supporting role in strengthening the resilience and longer-term sustainability of both companies.

2.3 Competition and consumer choice

The strongest evidence of positive impacts on competition and consumer choice comes from the CityFibre case study. In all areas where CityFibre won LFFN contracts, the programme enabled the company to enter and scale rapidly, becoming one of the largest network providers in those markets. In some locations, particularly Wolverhampton, there is evidence that CityFibre’s entry also prompted a competitive response from Openreach (an incumbent operator). As CityFibre operates on a wholesale basis, its expansion has also led to a substantial increase in consumer choice, with multiple ISPs offering services and a wider range of packages available.

The CNI case study provides further evidence of localised competitive effects. In Blackpool, LFFN-enabled access to CNI infrastructure supported ITS’s entry and growth, allowing it to become one of the largest business connectivity providers in the area.

In other locations, LFFN played a more supporting role. In Mid Sussex and Northern Ireland, F&W Networks and Fibrus have become key players in their markets, but both would have expanded in any case; LFFN enabled this to happen more quickly and on a slightly larger scale. In Tay Cities and Belfast, market impacts were limited. Contracts were primarily won by incumbent providers (Openreach and VMO2), and any increase in retail choice, particularly in Tay Cities, is likely to have been small in scale.

2.4 Affordability and pricing

There is evidence that LFFN contributed to improved affordability in local markets in several areas. In all case study areas where LFFN supported alt-nets, these providers (CityFibre, F&W Networks and Fibrus) were offering the most affordable broadband deals available locally, indicating downward pressure on prices.

In several CityFibre areas, this effect can be attributed to LFFN, as the programme facilitated CityFibre’s entry into the local market. In the CNI case study, F&W Networks reported that access to dark fibre through CNI enabled it to offer higher-quality services at lower cost, supporting more affordable pricing.

By contrast, there is no evidence of improvements in affordability or pricing in Tay Cities or Belfast, where LFFN delivery was led by incumbent providers.

2.5 Market signal effects

Market signal effects refer to the extent to which LFFN influenced wider supplier behaviour beyond the areas directly supported, for example by setting more ambitious targets, encouraging additional investment or changing investment strategies in other locations.

The evaluation found no evidence of market signal effects associated with LFFN. Across all case studies, suppliers reported that the programme did not influence their wider investment strategies or decisions about where to deploy network infrastructure beyond LFFN-supported areas. Investment decisions continued to be driven primarily by market factors, commercial considerations and access to private capital.

2.6 Market coordination and reducing duplication

Market coordination and the potential to reduce duplication of network build was examined primarily through the CNI case study. The CNI model was intended to support a more coordinated and collaborative approach to broadband investment, with different members working together and sharing infrastructure, thereby reducing duplication and overbuild.

In practice, the evaluation found limited evidence that this has been achieved. CNI members interviewed did not report joint working or coordinated planning with other members. In Mid Sussex, there has continued to be a high level of overbuild, with multiple alt-nets entering the market and constructing their own networks rather than using shared infrastructure.

This appears to reflect a combination of low visibility of CNI infrastructure among some market participants and a historic reluctance among operators to share assets, which together have constrained the extent to which the model has influenced wider investment behaviour or reduced duplication in practice. A new infrastructure-sharing framework developed with the Independent Networks Cooperative Association is intended to improve asset visibility and provide clearer mechanisms for sharing, with the aim of supporting greater coordination over time.

3. National market impacts

At a national level, LFFN’s market impacts were modest in scale and highly targeted, reflecting the size and design of the programme. LFFN supported a limited number of suppliers and projects and operated alongside much larger commercial investment and other public interventions, which were the primary drivers of national broadband market outcomes.

Within this context, the evaluation found that LFFN made several positive and credible national contributions. Most notably, LFFN strengthened the delivery capability of key suppliers, particularly CityFibre and Fibrus, by providing experience of delivering large-scale publicly funded contracts. This contributed to both companies securing further public sector work and maintaining a stronger market position during a period of market consolidation. There is also evidence of diffusion of delivery and commercial models developed through LFFN, although these effects remain limited in scale.

Alongside these positive contributions, the evaluation found no evidence of wider market signal effects, with suppliers reporting that LFFN did not influence their overall investment strategies beyond LFFN-supported areas. In addition, a substantial proportion of LFFN contracts were delivered by incumbent providers, and in these cases impacts on competition and consumer choice are likely to have been limited.

4. Overall conclusions

The evidence from work package one indicates that LFFN supported some elements of its theory of change, but that its market impacts were varied and context dependent. The strongest evidence of impact comes from the CityFibre case study, where LFFN addressed a key barrier to delivery by providing the funding to unlock anchor tenancy projects. In these locations, LFFN enabled new supplier entry, increased competition, and contributed to improved affordability and consumer choice.

By contrast, evidence from the Tay Cities case study illustrates the limits of LFFN’s market impact where contracts were delivered by incumbent providers. In these areas, where Openreach won Public Sector Building Upgrade contracts, there is limited evidence of wider market benefits beyond accelerated delivery of planned investment.

Overall, the findings indicate that LFFN’s market impacts depended less on scale and more on how the funding was used. Where LFFN intervened at a genuine pinch point preventing local authorities from advancing their digital ambitions, it was able to strongly influence market outcomes; where it aligned with activity that would have happened anyway, its additional effect was more limited.