Practical proposed steps for Hammersmith and Fulham.
The stages explain what should happen first. They are not promised completion dates. Funding, powers and ongoing costs need to be established before a proposal is adopted.
Proposal
Keep the housing-safety checks effective
The council reviews six core safety areas across its housing.
Proposed response: Keep attention on overdue work and residents’ reports between formal reviews.
Evidence
Who could lead: Council housing safety team.
- Short term
Explain how residents can report hazards and obtain inspection information.
- Medium term
Resolve overdue actions and check completed repairs.
- Long term
Publish recurring hazards and improvements alongside compliance measures.
How to judge progress
Starting point: Annual review covers April 2025 to March 2026.
Measure: Safety actions closed and repeat hazards.
Trade-off: An inspection statistic cannot substitute for fixing a particular home.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Council housing safety programme →
Proposal
Protect learning during the Avonmore rebuild
The council describes existing school buildings as no longer fit for purpose.
Proposed response: Set out how teaching and access will continue through any approved works.
Evidence
Who could lead: Council education team and school.
- Short term
Publish construction access, temporary arrangements and support for additional needs.
- Medium term
Coordinate moves and fit-out with the school calendar.
- Long term
Check that new facilities work for pupils and staff.
How to judge progress
Starting point: September 2026 enabling decision; no new school opening established.
Measure: Teaching continuity and accessible facilities ready.
Trade-off: A constrained school site must balance construction, homes and pupils’ needs.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Avonmore Primary School and homes →
Proposal
Deliver the affordable homes alongside the school
The Avonmore scheme includes 45 affordable homes within 91 proposed homes.
Proposed response: Track the agreed housing mix and school as linked commitments.
Evidence
Who could lead: Council housing and education teams.
- Short term
Publish the phase sequence and housing tenures.
- Medium term
Monitor legal commitments and construction milestones together.
- Long term
Confirm occupied homes and the usable school before calling the package delivered.
How to judge progress
Starting point: Cabinet’s September 2026 scheme description.
Measure: Homes by tenure and school handover.
Trade-off: Cross-funding and site constraints can affect phasing.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Avonmore Primary School and homes →
Proposal
Make the Civic Campus contract change transparent
A June decision approved contract termination and a strategy to procure completion works.
Proposed response: Explain remaining work and its effect on services and cost.
Evidence
Who could lead: Council project and procurement teams.
- Short term
Publish the remaining public scope and service access arrangements.
- Medium term
Track the replacement procurement and changes to cost or programme.
- Long term
Verify facilities individually at handover.
How to judge progress
Starting point: 19 June 2026 decision; whole-site completion not established.
Measure: Remaining work, confirmed contracts and usable facilities.
Trade-off: Procurement and commercial confidentiality must not obscure public delivery milestones.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Civic Campus remaining works →
Proposal
Make room for homes people can afford
Average private rent is £2,825 a month (August 2026) in Hammersmith and Fulham council area. This is £1,366 higher than the England average for the same month. Homes rented privately ranged from 25.5% in College Park & Old Oak to 45.1% in Avonmore — a gap of 19.6 percentage points.
Housing costs matter most alongside earnings and the number of affordable homes available. A local average cannot tell us whether a particular household can afford its home.
Who could lead: The housing and planning authorities, housing associations and developers.
- Start now
Publish the local waiting list, temporary accommodation and affordable-home delivery figures together. Start by checking the different needs in Avonmore and College Park & Old Oak; census differences are not proof of unmet demand.
- Over the next few years
Test proposed housing sites against affordable-home need, access to work, school places and water capacity.
- Over the longer term
Check whether completed homes reduce unmet need, rather than counting planning permissions as delivery.
How to judge progress
Starting point: Average private rent is £2,825 a month (August 2026) in Hammersmith and Fulham council area. Homes rented privately ranged from 25.5% in College Park & Old Oak to 45.1% in Avonmore — a gap of 19.6 percentage points. 21 March 2021; 21 of 21 current wards have comparable figures.
Measure: Affordable homes completed, households waiting, time in temporary accommodation, and rent compared with local earnings.
Trade-off: More homes can put pressure on infrastructure and land. Affordability requirements also affect development viability.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Evidence: Average monthly rent →
Evidence: Average home price →
Avonmore Primary School and homes →
Council housing safety programme →
Proposal
Plan homes and care around an older population
10.4% of people in Hammersmith and Fulham council area were aged 65 or over (21 March 2021). People aged 65 or over ranged from 8.2% in White City to 14.2% in Palace & Hurlingham — a gap of 6 percentage points.
Age alone does not mean poor health or a need for care. Accessible homes, reliable transport and support close to home matter as people get older.
Who could lead: Adult social care, local health services, housing providers and transport authorities.
- Start now
Compare the location of older residents with access to care, shops and transport. Start by checking the different needs in Palace & Hurlingham and White City; census differences are not proof of unmet demand.
- Over the next few years
Prioritise home adaptations and care capacity in places with the clearest unmet need.
- Over the longer term
Build accessible homes and joined-up care into local development plans.
How to judge progress
Starting point: 10.4% aged 65 or over; 21 March 2021. People aged 65 or over ranged from 8.2% in White City to 14.2% in Palace & Hurlingham — a gap of 6 percentage points. 21 March 2021; 21 of 21 current wards have comparable figures.
Measure: Waits for home adaptations and care, avoidable hospital stays, and accessible homes delivered.
Trade-off: Services need skilled staff and ongoing funding. Age profiles alone cannot measure unmet care need.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Evidence: People aged 65 or over →
Proposal
Bring support closer to people in poor health
4.1% of people reported bad or very bad health in Hammersmith and Fulham council area (21 March 2021). Across England, the figure was 5.2%. People reporting bad or very bad health ranged from 2.6% in Fulham Town to 6.1% in Shepherd's Bush Green — a gap of 3.5 percentage points.
This is how residents described their health in the census. It can reveal differences between neighbourhoods, but does not diagnose illness or measure current waiting times. Age profiles differ between places, so these shares do not measure service quality.
Who could lead: Local health services, public health teams, employers and community organisations.
- Start now
Use neighbourhood evidence to find where poor health and barriers to services overlap. Start by checking the different needs in Shepherd's Bush Green and Fulham Town; census differences are not proof of unmet demand.
- Over the next few years
Test accessible local support and publish who is reached and who is missed.
- Over the longer term
Review whether health gaps narrow, alongside housing and employment improvements.
How to judge progress
Starting point: 4.1% reporting bad or very bad health; 21 March 2021. People reporting bad or very bad health ranged from 2.6% in Fulham Town to 6.1% in Shepherd's Bush Green — a gap of 3.5 percentage points. 21 March 2021; 21 of 21 current wards have comparable figures.
Measure: Access to services and the health gap between neighbourhoods, using comparable age-adjusted measures when available.
Trade-off: A census snapshot is dated. New service decisions also need current needs assessments and residents’ experience.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Evidence: People reporting bad or very bad health →
Proposal
Connect local skills to local opportunities
57.6% of people aged 16 or over had a degree or equivalent (21 March 2021) in Hammersmith and Fulham council area. Across England, the figure was 33.9%. People aged 16+ with no qualifications ranged from 6.8% in Fulham Town to 17.9% in College Park & Old Oak — a gap of 11.1 percentage points.
Qualifications show one part of the skills available locally. They do not show whether people have secure jobs or work that uses those skills.
Who could lead: Employers, colleges, universities and the relevant skills authority.
- Start now
Compare vacancies and employer needs with training available to local residents. Start by checking the different needs in College Park & Old Oak and Fulham Town; census differences are not proof of unmet demand.
- Over the next few years
Link training to real jobs, including routes for people without formal qualifications.
- Over the longer term
Track sustained employment and earnings after training, not just course starts.
How to judge progress
Starting point: 57.6% with a degree or equivalent; 21 March 2021. People aged 16+ with no qualifications ranged from 6.8% in Fulham Town to 17.9% in College Park & Old Oak — a gap of 11.1 percentage points. 21 March 2021; 21 of 21 current wards have comparable figures.
Measure: Sustained jobs, earnings and training completion for residents who face barriers to work.
Trade-off: Training takes time and cannot create demand for jobs on its own. Qualifications are not a complete measure of ability.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Evidence: People aged 16+ with a degree or equivalent →
Evidence: People aged 16+ with no qualifications →
Civic Campus remaining works →
Proposal
Target safety work where problems repeat
Mapped police records are available for neighbourhoods in Hammersmith and Fulham council area.
Published locations are approximate and some crimes are not mapped. Counts show recorded incidents, not the chance of an individual becoming a victim.
Who could lead: The local police force, council community safety team and relevant services.
- Start now
Check recurring places and categories alongside local police priorities and residents’ reports.
- Over the next few years
Test focused prevention and support, with a comparison period agreed before the work starts.
- Over the longer term
Publish whether problems fall, move elsewhere or return, and adjust the response.
How to judge progress
Crime evidence and coverage →
Starting point: Use the dated, complete periods shown in Crime and safety; keep anti-social behaviour separate.
Measure: Comparable recorded incidents, repeat victimisation and residents’ reported experience; never a single crude league table.
Trade-off: More reporting can increase recorded crime. Enforcement and support may work differently for different problems.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Council housing safety programme →
Proposal
Turn published plans into visible progress
3 named local projects or plans have official evidence in this collection.
A published plan makes responsibilities and intentions easier to inspect. It does not prove that funding is secured or that promised benefits have arrived.
Who could lead: The named project owners and council scrutiny bodies.
- Start now
Put the scope, owner, funding position and next milestone in one public place.
- Over the next few years
Report delivery against the agreed scope and explain delays or changes.
- Over the longer term
Check the benefits residents actually receive after completion.
How to judge progress
Starting point: The dated stages in Projects; unknown costs and funding remain unknown.
Measure: Milestones met, costs against the approved budget, and measured outcomes after delivery.
Trade-off: Delivery reporting takes staff time, but a launch announcement alone cannot show value for money.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Avonmore Primary School and homes →
Civic Campus remaining works →
Council housing safety programme →
Proposal
Target support where disadvantages overlap
Households facing two or more measured disadvantages ranged from 10.7% in Parsons Green & Sandford to 27.1% in Shepherd's Bush Green — a gap of 16.4 percentage points.
These households met at least two census conditions covering education, employment, health and housing. This is not an income or poverty measure.
Who could lead: The council's housing, public health and employment teams, with local services.
- Start now
Check current advice and support access in Shepherd's Bush Green, using the census pattern as a starting point and asking residents what is missing.
- Over the next few years
Test joined-up housing, work and health support, and publish who takes part, who cannot reach it and what changes.
- Over the longer term
Track sustained outcomes and whether gaps between neighbourhoods narrow, using comparable dates and measures.
How to judge progress
Starting point: Households facing two or more measured disadvantages ranged from 10.7% in Parsons Green & Sandford to 27.1% in Shepherd's Bush Green — a gap of 16.4 percentage points. 21 March 2021; 21 of 21 wards.
Measure: Access to support, unresolved housing problems and sustained work or health outcomes. Census percentages alone cannot measure a new programme's success.
Trade-off: Targeting neighbourhoods can miss people in need elsewhere. Avoid labelling every resident by the average for their ward.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Evidence: Households facing two or more measured disadvantages →
Avonmore Primary School and homes →
Civic Campus remaining works →
Council housing safety programme →
