Insight Paper 002
Meanwhile Use and MTFS Alignment Clarifying Risk Value and Sustainability
Local Authorities are increasingly required to make strategic decisions on asset utilisation within a context of constrained resources and long term financial planning. Meanwhile use has emerged as a practical mechanism to manage vacant assets while supporting service objectives and local regeneration priorities.
However across the sector there remains a degree of inconsistency in how meanwhile use is evaluated particularly in relation to its impact on the Medium Term Financial Strategy and wider financial sustainability.
From a governance perspective the principles set out by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy emphasise transparency accountability and value for money. These principles require Local Authorities to ensure that asset utilisation decisions are aligned with corporate priorities and supported by clear financial planning. Meanwhile use should therefore be considered within the broader context of asset strategy and financial sustainability rather than as a standalone or short term intervention.
Meanwhile use is typically deployed to activate vacant buildings reduce holding costs and provide community or commercial benefit during periods prior to redevelopment or disposal. When structured effectively it can reduce security and maintenance expenditure generate interim income and support place based objectives.
However the financial implications are not always fully integrated into Medium Term Financial Strategies. In some cases assumptions relating to capital receipts redevelopment timelines or income generation are not adjusted to reflect meanwhile use arrangements. This can create a disconnect between asset level decisions and corporate financial planning.
Importantly meanwhile use is not inherently neutral from a financial perspective. While it may reduce short term costs it can also delay redevelopment or disposal activity which in turn affects the timing of capital receipts and associated revenue assumptions. Where these impacts are not clearly modelled within the MTFS there is a risk that financial forecasts become misaligned with delivery reality.
The use of meanwhile arrangements also introduces considerations around governance lease structuring and exit strategy. Without clear parameters there is potential for arrangements to extend beyond their intended timeframe which can further affect programme delivery and financial assumptions.
CIPFA guidance consistently highlights the importance of aligning asset management with financial planning and ensuring that decisions are supported by robust data and clear governance. This includes understanding not only the immediate benefits of asset use but also the longer term implications for financial sustainability.
A more structured approach involves integrating meanwhile use into strategic asset management planning with clear links to corporate priorities and MTFS assumptions. This includes defining the purpose of meanwhile use establishing measurable outcomes and ensuring that financial impacts are reflected within medium term forecasts.
Ultimately meanwhile use should be understood as a strategic tool rather than a purely operational response. When aligned with asset strategy and financial planning it can support both service objectives and financial resilience. When applied without this alignment it has the potential to introduce risk and reduce clarity within the Medium Term Financial Strategy.
