4 June 2026
The ALMO model of council housing management: delivering on results and value for money
Eamon McGoldrick
NFA Managing Director
ACROSS many years of my career, I have argued that the ALMO model of council housing management brings much-needed specialised focus to a complex job.
I have had the privilege of steering the NFA, the organisation that represents England’s 15 remaining ALMOs, for more than a decade, But I also draw on my experience as former CEO of an ALMO that transformed a London Borough’s failing housing department into a three-star top performer.
This is an approach that demands compulsory oversight by a healthy mix of tenants, elected representatives and independent experts and stakeholders. It separates out many aspects of housing management from other council functions. It informs every aspect of training and work. And ultimately this means better services and value for money for council housing tenants.
Each year, as we prepare to get our members together at our annual conference to do what they do best – an honest sharing of experience and best practice – it is my job to look into the trusty NFA crystal ball and weigh up what I think the future holds for us. This year, however, since ALMO performance over the last year shows so clearly that this is an approach that is still as relevant as ever, I think a look backwards is the necessary first step.
With the Regulator of Social Housing’s new regime now in full swing, the local authority sector has now earned 11 top C1 grades out of 87 inspections; and five of that dozen – close to half, to hammer the point home – have gone to councils that manage their housing through an ALMO. Our 15 members have also recorded another excellent set of Tenant Satisfaction Measures, again with consistently and significantly higher average scores than achieved by direct in-house council housing management. And most recently, independent evidence shows that our members can on average do all this at a similar cost – or even a little less – than direct delivery.
Rightly, the heightened regulation regime prompted by the 2017 Grenfell Tower tragedy has restored monitoring of social housing landlord performance that was lost with the 2012 abolition of the Audit Commission. As a direct result, I believe, it is now possible to detect a sea-change underway in governance and accountability mechanisms in the council housing sector – and that change leans heavily on what we have learned in the past 20 years or so of ALMO-led improvement.
The local authority sector has now earned 11 top C1 grades from 87 Regulator inspections; and five – close to half – have gone to councils that manage their housing through a local authority-owned arms-length organisation. Our members’ specialist housing focus earns its keep in both value for money and results.
HIBs, HABs, HIOBs… Not urban slang. Instead a breakout phenomenon in the council end of the social housing sector, particularly where local authorities have been found lacking by the Regulator. No surprise that the H stands for housing and the B for board. The word in the middle varies from council to council – advisory, improvement, operations – and the membership is likewise something of a moveable feast, decided in line with local needs and preferences. But all bring both independent expertise and tenant engagement to the table, injecting that perspective into oversight of service delivery which the ALMO experience has proved is so valuable and effective.
In some circles, during that hiatus in regulation and monitoring post-2012, this was once considered superfluous. It is now clear that over halfway through the RSH four-year inspection cycle, judgements of the sector highlight issues that are, at their root, about governance and accountability. Local authorities cannot pass the Regulator’s exam without a really clear focus on their assurance mechanisms and governance. Local authorities with ALMOs, arguably, have this structural advantage built into their DNA.
As someone who chairs the Croydon Housing Advisory Board as well as running the NFA, I can see many useful lessons from the ALMO sector for these boards, and I am keen to make sure we continue to share knowledge and experience. Throughout 2026, with the NFA team, I am very much looking forward to working on the development of a new network for the members of such boards in partnership with the newly formed Association of Directors of Housing.
And who knows – is it possible that there might be a new ALMO or two to welcome in 2027 as the Regulator of Social Housing finally flexes its muscles? The new regime gives the Regulator wide powers – and perhaps it’s not beyond the bounds of possibility that for persistently poor-performing local authorities, the best possible solution might be the outsourcing of its housing management to an ALMO. The crystal ball doesn’t rule it out completely.
Eamon’s career in housing spans four decades, beginning as a management trainee with Greater London Council and then working with the London Boroughs of Brent, Hillingdon and Barnet. In 2004, he became CEO of Homes for Islington. Now an independent consultant, he took on the role of MD at the NFA in 2013. He is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Housing and Institute of Management.