A new report has delivered a stark verdict on the government’s flagship home insulation schemes, calling the collapse of the ECO4 and Great British Insulation Scheme a “wake‑up call” for retrofit policy.
It says past programmes focused too narrowly on emissions targets while failing to fix basic home repair issues, leaving many households cold, damp and with rising bills.
The authors argue that without major changes, future retrofit programmes risk repeating the same mistakes and continuing to miss the homes that need help most.
Damning findings from Government schemes
The report – released this week by the Centre for Housing and Place – paints a critical picture of the Energy Company Obligation 4 (ECO4) and the Great British Insulation Scheme, both of which were terminated after widespread problems and poor outcomes.
According to the report, these schemes often failed to address fundamental repair needs before installing energy efficiency measures, leading in many cases to damp, mould and other issues that undermined the intended benefits. The report called the delivery model “inadequate” and says the heavy reliance on private contractors incentivised cutting corners rather than quality work.
Researchers also note that while both programmes aimed to reduce carbon emissions and help households cut energy costs, too many homes, particularly in older and underserved communities, were excluded because they required more complex repair work before retrofit.
With rising energy bills continuing to affect millions of families, the report warns that this gap has left too many vulnerable households behind.
Calls for a new framework
In place of the old schemes, the report suggests a radical shift toward area‑based and neighbourhood‑level programmes that tackle both energy efficiency and basic home repairs together.
Rather than focusing solely on heat pumps, insulation or solar panels, the authors argue that retrofit policy must be grounded in ensuring all homes reach a basic standard of health and safety first.
This approach, they say, would deliver bigger, long‑lasting benefits in terms of lower bills, healthier homes and reduced greenhouse gas emissions.
Importantly, the report emphasises that lessons from the recently scrapped ECO4 scheme and its predecessors must inform future policy design. It calls for new institutional frameworks, stronger oversight, better community engagement, and a move away from short‑term contractor models toward sustained investment in skills and quality delivery.
Learning from past errors
The report doesn’t just criticise past programmes – it lays out a practical roadmap for getting retrofit right the next time, for instance, with the government's new Warm Homes Plan.
Instead of repeating the same narrowly focused initiatives, it calls for a fundamentally different way of delivering home improvements that ensures quality, fairness, and impact.
The four main suggestions from the framework proposal are:
1. Plan at neighbourhood level, not project by project
Rather than funding individual measures house by house, retrofit should be organised at the scale of whole streets or areas.
This allows planners to prioritise homes that need structural repairs first (e.g., damp proofing, roof fixes) before energy upgrades – something that past schemes often ignored. The report argues this is essential for both effectiveness and cost‑efficiency.
“You can’t just bolt insulation onto a broken house – first you have to fix the house,” said one lead author. “Neighbourhood‑scale planning stops energy upgrades becoming expensive window dressing.”
2. Build quality into the system from the start
A major shortcoming of programmes like ECO4 and the Great British Insulation Scheme, the report says, was the reliance on short‑term contracts and minimum cost incentives that encouraged rushed or substandard work.
To fix this, it proposes:
- Strong independent quality checks at every stage, not just after installation
- Clear workmanship standards tied to funding
- Public‑sector or long‑term community retrofit teams that develop expertise rather than shifting hundreds of contractors in and out
“Quality assurance can’t be an afterthought or box‑ticking exercise,” the report states. “Homes must be retrofit‑ready before energy measures are installed."
3. Protect residents, especially tenants
Too often, the people living in homes did not see the benefits of retrofit because costs were passed on through higher rents or disruption forced temporary (and sometimes permanent) displacement.
The report recommends:
- Tenant safeguards so landlords cannot raise rents or evict tenants because of retrofit works
- Compensation or accommodation support during disruptive works
- Stronger enforcement of housing standards alongside retrofit funding
“Investment in homes should improve lives - not lead to eviction and higher rents,” a senior researcher said.
4. Stop scaling up failed models and start building capacity
The authors make clear that simply spending more money on the same delivery models will not solve deep‑rooted problems. Instead, they call for public investment in:
- Dedicated retrofit bodies at county or regional level
- A skilled, permanent retrofit workforce
- Integrated planning between energy, housing and health agencies
“Expanding yesterday’s schemes just expands yesterday’s mistakes,” the report warns.
“We need new institutions, not bigger versions of broken ones.”
