Understanding what the Community Renewal Fund revealed about local growth delivery

The evaluation examined how the programme operated across the UK, what delivery approaches were adopted locally, and what the programme helped to achieve across projects covering employment support, skills development, business support, and place-based investment.

The work combined programme performance analysis, process evaluation, and a review of more than 300 project-level evaluations completed during and after delivery.

The evaluation explored:

• how projects were selected and managed
• how local partnerships operated
• programme spend, outputs, and outcomes
• lessons emerging from different intervention types
• how delivery informed preparations for UKSPF

The study found that the CRF supported a broad range of local growth activity within a compressed delivery period. By the end of the programme, £186m had been spent across 466 projects, with support reaching more than 390,000 individuals, over 50,000 businesses, and more than 23,000 organisations.

Evidence from Lead Authorities and delivery partners highlighted several themes linked to delivery effectiveness, including:

• proactive approaches to beneficiary engagement
• projects designed around local needs
• flexible support offers
• strong delivery partnerships
• coordination between organisations

The evaluation also examined how national programme structures influenced local delivery. This included analysis of appraisal processes, contracting approaches, guidance, monitoring arrangements, and relationships between central government, Lead Authorities, and project delivery organisations.

Wavehill developed a detailed typology of intervention types across the four investment priorities, enabling more granular analysis of delivery approaches and outcomes. The work also drew together learning from project evaluations to identify common patterns in successful delivery and recurring operational challenges.

The evaluation contributed evidence to support the development of the UK Shared Prosperity Fund and wider discussions around future local growth programmes. It left behind a structured body of learning on programme management, partnership delivery, monitoring approaches, and locally responsive intervention design that could be applied across future place-based investment programmes.

The full evaluation report is available here