What Is the Crisis and Resilience Fund? A Complete Guide
A definitive guide to the Crisis and Resilience Fund (CRF), the UK government programme replacing the Household Support Fund. Covers all four strands, eligibility, delivery models, and reporting requirements for local authorities.
The Crisis and Resilience Fund (CRF) is a UK government programme delivered through local authorities to support individuals and households in crisis. It replaces the Household Support Fund with a three-year settlement of approximately £1 billion per year from April 2026, giving councils both the funding certainty and the operational mandate to move beyond one-off emergency payments towards building long-term household resilience.
TL;DR: The CRF is a multi-year, multi-strand programme that requires local authorities to process crisis payments within 48 hours, manage housing-related awards, commission resilience services, and coordinate community referral networks -- all while submitting quarterly management information (MI) returns to DWP. It represents a fundamental shift from reactive emergency handouts to structured, outcome-driven crisis support.
What you'll learn: How the CRF works, what the four strands cover, who is eligible, how MI reporting works, and what software and processes councils need to deliver it effectively.
Who this is for: Local authority programme managers, benefits teams, VCS delivery partners, and anyone involved in designing or delivering crisis support schemes.
Why the CRF Exists
The Household Support Fund (HSF) operated as a series of short-term extensions from 2021, creating planning uncertainty for local authorities and inconsistent provision for residents. Research from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation found that approximately 7 million low-income households in the UK were going without essentials including food during 2024, with demand for local welfare assistance rising sharply year on year.
Policy intent: The CRF replaces this reactive model with a structured programme that addresses both immediate crisis and the underlying factors that cause repeat demand. According to government guidance, the fund aims to reduce reliance on emergency support by investing in resilience-building services alongside crisis payments.
Funding settlement: At roughly £1 billion per year over three years, the CRF gives councils a stable funding envelope for the first time. This contrasts with the HSF, which was typically confirmed for six-month periods, making it difficult for councils to commission longer-term services or hire permanent staff.
Accountability shift: Councils must now report against seven defined outcome indicators and submit quarterly MI returns signed off by their Section 151 Officer. This moves the programme from a discretionary pot to a structured, auditable scheme.
The CRF represents the most significant reform of local crisis support since the abolition of the Social Fund's discretionary elements in 2013.
The Four Strands of CRF
The CRF is organised into four strands, each covering a distinct area of support. Councils have flexibility in how they weight spending across strands, but must demonstrate activity in all four.
Strand 1: Crisis Payments
Direct financial support for individuals and households facing an immediate crisis -- boiler breakdowns, benefit delays, emergency food needs, or utility disconnections. Applications must be processed within a 48-hour SLA. Payment channels include bank transfer, PayPoint vouchers, and cash vouchers to ensure no household is excluded by payment method.
Strand 2: Housing Payments
Support for housing-related costs including rent deposit guarantees, benefit shortfall payments, and emergency accommodation. This strand requires councils to assess tenancy agreements and benefit entitlements to calculate accurate shortfall amounts.
Strand 3: Resilience Services
Commissioned services that address the root causes of crisis -- energy advice, budgeting support, debt counselling, employment readiness programmes, and mental health referrals. Delivery partners (often VCS organisations) track outcomes against the CRF framework through ongoing case management.
Strand 4: Community Coordination
A referral and coordination layer connecting councils, VCS organisations, housing providers, and statutory services into a no-wrong-door network. This strand ensures that every household accessing crisis support is connected to relevant longer-term services.
All four strands must work together. A crisis payment (Strand 1) should trigger a referral to resilience services (Strand 3) via the coordination network (Strand 4), with housing needs (Strand 2) addressed where relevant.
Who Is Eligible for CRF Support
Eligibility criteria are set locally by each council within the parameters of DWP guidance. Common eligibility factors include:
Income thresholds: Households receiving Universal Credit, Pension Credit, or other means-tested benefits are typically eligible. Some councils extend eligibility to low-income working households not on benefits.
Crisis triggers: A demonstrable crisis event -- job loss, benefit sanction, domestic abuse, bereavement, sudden illness, or essential appliance failure -- is usually required for Strand 1 payments.
Residency: Applicants must typically reside in the local authority area. Councils must also consider support for individuals with no recourse to public funds where there is an imminent risk of destitution.
Repeat applications: The CRF places particular emphasis on monitoring repeat applications. A declining repeat rate is one of the key success indicators, signalling that resilience services are having an effect. National data from the HSF period showed that repeat application rates often exceeded 30% in areas without structured follow-up services.
Councils are expected to publish clear eligibility criteria and ensure application routes are accessible, including provision for applicants who do not speak English as a first language or who have limited digital access.
MI Reporting and Outcome Indicators
Quarterly MI returns to DWP are a mandatory requirement. Returns must be signed off by the council's Section 151 Officer and include data across all four strands.
The Seven CRF Outcome Indicators
| Indicator | Description |
|---|---|
| 1. Reduced material deprivation | Fewer households reporting inability to afford essentials |
| 2. Reduced reliance on food banks | Declining food bank referral rates among supported households |
| 3. Increased household savings | Evidence of improved financial buffers, however small |
| 4. Improved housing stability | Reduced eviction risk and improved tenancy sustainment |
| 5. Reduced repeat crisis applications | Falling rate of repeat applications within 12 months |
| 6. Increased employment readiness | Progress towards employment, training, or volunteering |
| 7. Improved wellbeing scores | Self-reported wellbeing improvement measured at follow-up |
Data collection: Outcome data flows primarily from Strand 3 delivery partners through ongoing case management. As partners work with households -- energy advice sessions, budgeting support, employment coaching -- their case notes and session records feed outcome data back to the council.
AI-generated narratives: Some councils are adopting platforms that generate written narrative summaries from live operational data, explaining trends and recommending actions rather than relying solely on spreadsheet figures. Plinth provides this capability as part of its CRF delivery platform.
Robust MI reporting requires a single system of record across all four strands. Councils relying on separate spreadsheets for each strand face significant data aggregation challenges at quarter-end.
How Councils Are Delivering the CRF
Delivery models vary depending on council size, capacity, and local VCS infrastructure. Three broad approaches are emerging:
In-house delivery: The council's benefits or welfare team processes crisis payments directly and commissions resilience services through standard procurement. This suits unitary authorities with established welfare teams.
Delegated delivery: The council delegates operational delivery to a trusted partner -- often a community foundation or infrastructure organisation -- while retaining strategic oversight and MI accountability. This suits councils with limited internal capacity but strong local VCS networks.
Hybrid model: The council processes Strand 1 and 2 payments in-house but commissions VCS partners for Strand 3 resilience services and Strand 4 coordination. This is the most common model, balancing control over financial disbursement with the expertise of local VCS organisations.
Whichever model is chosen, the council remains accountable for MI returns and outcome reporting. According to the Local Government Association, approximately 152 upper-tier local authorities in England are responsible for delivering the CRF, each designing their scheme to reflect local need.
The July 2026 deadline for scheme design means councils must finalise their delivery model, commission partners, and implement technology in a compressed timeframe.
Technology Requirements
The operational demands of the CRF -- 48-hour SLAs, multi-strand tracking, quarterly MI aggregation, and multi-agency referrals -- make manual processes impractical at scale.
Application processing: Online application forms with document upload, AI-assisted evidence reading (bank statements, utility bills, benefit letters), and eligibility pre-screening reduce processing time from days to hours.
Payment orchestration: Multi-channel disbursement (bank transfer, PayPoint, cash voucher) with audit trails and reconciliation.
Case management: Ongoing case tracking for resilience services, with outcome recording linked to the seven CRF indicators.
Referral management: Digital referral pathways between the council and VCS delivery partners, ensuring no-wrong-door routing and outcome data flow-back.
MI generation: Automated quarterly reports compiled from live operational data, with Section 151 sign-off workflows.
Plinth provides an end-to-end platform covering all four strands, from crisis payment processing through to AI-generated MI returns. Plinth's CRF platform is designed to process applications well within the 48-hour SLA through AI-assisted evidence reading and automated workflows.
Common Challenges
Scheme design under time pressure: With the April 2026 start date and July 2026 design deadline, councils must move quickly while consulting with local stakeholders.
Data integration across strands: Without a unified platform, aggregating data from crisis payments, housing awards, resilience services, and referrals into a single MI return is labour-intensive and error-prone.
VCS partner capacity: Commissioning resilience services requires VCS partners with the capacity to deliver, record outcomes, and report back digitally. Not all local areas have mature VCS infrastructure.
Accessibility: Application routes must be accessible to all residents, including those with limited English, low digital literacy, or disabilities. Multilingual forms and voice-to-text capabilities are increasingly expected.
Measuring resilience outcomes: Unlike crisis payments, resilience outcomes are measured over months, requiring sustained case management and follow-up that many councils have not previously resourced.
Frequently Asked Questions
How does the CRF differ from the Household Support Fund?
The CRF is a three-year settlement rather than a series of short extensions. It requires activity across four defined strands (not just emergency payments), mandates quarterly MI returns to DWP, and measures success against seven outcome indicators. The HSF had fewer reporting requirements and no structured resilience or coordination strands.
Can councils use existing HSF processes for the CRF?
Partially. Strand 1 crisis payment processes may carry over, but the CRF's additional strands, outcome tracking, and MI reporting requirements mean most councils need to expand their systems and processes significantly. Councils relying on spreadsheets for HSF will find the CRF reporting burden unmanageable without dedicated software.
What happens if a council fails to meet the 48-hour SLA?
The 48-hour SLA for crisis payments is a programme requirement. Persistent failure to meet it could affect future funding allocations and would be flagged in MI returns. Councils are expected to have escalation processes for complex cases that cannot be resolved within the standard timeframe.
Who signs off MI returns?
The council's Section 151 Officer (the statutory chief finance officer) must sign off quarterly MI returns before submission to DWP. This requires a clear audit trail from operational data to the final return.
Can VCS organisations access CRF funding directly?
VCS organisations do not receive CRF allocations directly. They are commissioned by local authorities to deliver Strand 3 resilience services and Strand 4 coordination activities. However, VCS partners often receive referrals and manage cases through the council's chosen delivery platform.
Is the CRF available across the whole of the UK?
The CRF as currently structured applies to England. Devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland have separate crisis support arrangements, though similar policy directions are emerging.
Recommended Next Pages
The Four Strands of CRF Explained -- A detailed walkthrough of how to deliver each strand effectively.
Best Software for Managing CRF Programmes -- A comparison of platforms designed for CRF delivery.
Crisis Fund Management vs Standard Grant Programmes -- Key differences councils need to understand.
CRF Use Case: How Plinth Supports Crisis and Resilience Fund Delivery -- See the platform in action across all four strands.
Case Management Best Practices -- Relevant for Strand 3 resilience service delivery.
Last updated: February 2026
For more information about delivering the CRF with Plinth, contact our team or schedule a demo.