Guidance

Local Regeneration Fund: accounting officer assessment

Published 2 September 2025

1. Background and context

The Local Regeneration Fund brings together the Levelling Up Fund (LUF), which includes LUF Rounds 1 - 3, Levelling Up Capital Projects (LUCP) announced at Spring Budget 2023, and the Levelling Up Capital projects announced at the Spring Budget and Autumn Statement 2023; Town Deals (TDs); and the Pathfinder Pilot schemes into one flexible funding scheme. The Fund is UK-wide, incorporating LUF projects in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. No new funding is available and existing funding commitments are honoured, meaning Local Authorities stand to receive the total funding due under the separate funding streams.

The Fund consolidates three separate streams into a single flexible pot. Local Authorities in receipt of the Local Regeneration Fund will:

• deliver against a flexible framework of outputs and outcomes, aligned with the government’s missions
• report against a streamlined set of indicators
• have the option to pool funding and move funding flexibly between projects locally
• manage a simplified payments process
• utilise a single digital platform

The Fund has around £2.5 billion still to be paid out to local authorities.

Projects that were safeguarded following the consultation on Levelling Up culture and capital regeneration in February 2025 are not in scope of the additional funding flexibility as the decision not to proceed with a planned withdrawal of funding was based on representations and circumstances for each specific project. Local authority accountable bodies for these projects will benefit from the monitoring burden reduction and revised payment model though.

These changes will not apply to LUF recipients that are not local authorities.

2. Assessment against the Accounting Officer standards

a. Regularity

There are no regularity concerns. Grants can be paid to recipients through use of the financial assistance powers in the UKIM Act 2020 (section 50) to make the Fund available to the whole of the UK.

Funding for Town Deals was paid out using financial assistance powers in the Local Government Act 2003 (section 31). We will issue an updated Memorandum of Understanding to confirm that funding will be paid out using the powers in the UKIM Act 2020 instead.

Overall assessment

My assessment is that the regularity test has been met.

b. Propriety

These reforms concern in-flight funding and honouring existing funding commitments, with no new allocations of funding being made as part of this. Therefore, propriety risks around the selection of specific places and/or projects are not applicable.

Overall assessment

My assessment is that the propriety test has been met.

c. Value for Money (vfm)

Improving the delivery model for in-flight funds will, in-line with the department’s commitment to a changed relationship with local government. empower Local Authorities; giving them the flexibility to rescope investment plans as required to overcome barriers to delivery. This will allow stalled projects, or those with viability issues to be reconsidered.

The funding in question has previously been assessed for VfM including its specific Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR). The department will continue to seek assurance from S151 officers and their equivalents on the VfM of the overall portfolio of investment.

Overall assessment

My assessment is that the Value for Money test has been met.

d. Feasibility

This reform draws confidence from the success of the Pathfinders Pilot. The Pilot demonstrated a way to address delivery burdens when faced with varied frameworks and processes. This simplified fund goes further, learning lessons from other funds, and enhancing freedoms to LAs and reducing administrative burdens.

Monitoring has been reduced in line with a simplified approach. We will continue to collect a degree of project-level data, albeit reduced and at longer intervals. Alongside, this we will conducti engagement activity helping to identify risk, allowing support to be targeted , and future evaluation to take place.

Overall assessment

My assessment is that the feasibility test has been met.

3. Conclusion

The above represents a summary of the key points which informed my decisions.  If any of these factors materially change during the lifetime of this project, I undertake to prepare a revised summary, setting out my assessment of them.

This summary will be published on the government’s website (GOV.UK). Copies will be deposited in the Library of the House of Commons and sent to the Comptroller and Auditor General and Treasury Officer of Accounts.