Ordinary FRA
Considers relevant fire risks and precautions for the premises, including available external-wall information where within scope.
Government data · June 2026
Cladding remediation tracker
See how remediation of unsafe cladding is progressing nationally and in reporting local authorities, using a transparent snapshot of MHCLG’s latest monthly release.
External-wall evidence route
FRA, FRAEW, PAS 9980 and EWS1 answer different questions
Start with the purpose of the evidence. A valuation form, specialist risk appraisal and whole-building fire risk assessment are connected, but one does not automatically replace another.
PAS 9980 / FRAEW
A specialist appraisal of external-wall fire-spread risk that can inform the whole-building FRA and risk management.
EWS1 form
A valuation and lending process for a specific building; it is not a fire-safety certificate or general legal compliance form.
Remediation evidence
Design, approvals, installation, inspection, commissioning and completion records used to demonstrate what changed.
Scope note: The necessary route depends on the building, the known concern and who needs the evidence. Obtain appropriately competent advice before commissioning intrusive or specialist work.
National position
Remediation status across England
“Completed” can include buildings awaiting building-control sign-off. “Not started” means works have not begun, even where a building has entered a programme or has plans.
Buildings monitored with unsafe cladding
1,681 completed
698 underway
2,090 not started
Approximately 102,000 dwellings
are estimated to be in monitored buildings where remediation had not started at the data date.
Change since May 2026
The monitored portfolio grew, while more buildings moved into work
change in buildings monitored
change in buildings started or completed
change in buildings completed
Changes can reflect new buildings, programme transfers and reconciled records as well as physical progress. The figures should not be interpreted as a simple cohort completion rate.
National time series
How the monitored portfolio has changed
Switch the measure to compare the published share for the latest 18 months. The sharp breaks in this series reflect methodology and portfolio changes as well as remediation activity.
Completed remediation: 29% in Jan-25 and 38% in Jun-26.
View the full published time series
| Month | Total monitored | Completed | Underway | In programme |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun-26 | 4,469 | 38% | 16% | 47% |
| May-26 | 4,411 | 38% | 15% | 47% |
| Apr-26 | 4,378 | 35% | 20% | 45% |
| Mar-26 | 4,322 | 35% | 20% | 44% |
| Feb-26 | 4,310 | 35% | 18% | 47% |
| Jan-26 | 4,191 | 36% | 17% | 48% |
| Dec-25 | 4,126 | 36% | 17% | 47% |
| Nov-25 | 5,613 | 35% | 14% | 51% |
| Oct-25 | 5,570 | 35% | 14% | 51% |
| Sep-25 | 5,558 | 35% | 14% | 52% |
| Aug-25 | 5,554 | 35% | 14% | 52% |
| Jul-25 | 5,214 | 34% | 14% | 52% |
| Jun-25 | 5,190 | 34% | 14% | 52% |
| May-25 | 5,176 | 34% | 14% | 52% |
| Apr-25 | 5,052 | 33% | 16% | 51% |
| Mar-25 | 5,031 | 33% | 16% | 51% |
| Feb-25 | 5,014 | 32% | 16% | 52% |
| Jan-25 | 5,025 | 29% | 18% | 52% |
| Dec-24 | 5,011 | 29% | 19% | 52% |
| Nov-24 | 4,998 | 29% | 19% | 52% |
| Oct-24 | 4,834 | 30% | 20% | 50% |
| Sep-24 | 4,821 | 29% | 21% | 50% |
| Aug-24 | 4,771 | 29% | 21% | 50% |
| Jul-24 | 4,630 | 29% | 20% | 50% |
| Jun-24 | 4,613 | 29% | 21% | 50% |
| May-24 | 4,374 | 25% | 22% | 53% |
| Apr-24 | 4,336 | 23% | 23% | 54% |
| Mar-24 | 4,329 | 23% | 23% | 55% |
| Feb-24 | 4,092 | 21% | 23% | 56% |
| Jan-24 | 3,972 | 21% | 22% | 58% |
| Dec-23 | 3,839 | 21% | 21% | 58% |
| Nov-23 | 3,824 | 20% | 22% | 58% |
| Oct-23 | 3,797 | 19% | 21% | 60% |
| Sep-23 | 1,364 | 40% | 23% | 37% |
| Aug-23 | 1,340 | 40% | 23% | 37% |
| Jul-23 | 1,350 | 39% | 23% | 38% |
| Jun-23 | 1,619 | 31% | 20% | 49% |
| May-23 | 1,624 | 31% | 20% | 50% |
| Apr-23 | 1,615 | 30% | 20% | 50% |
| Mar-23 | 1,618 | 29% | 20% | 51% |
| Feb-23 | 1,617 | 29% | 20% | 52% |
| Jan-23 | 1,608 | 28% | 19% | 52% |
| Dec-22 | 1,602 | 28% | 19% | 53% |
Download and cite
Reusable cladding-remediation evidence
Download the complete derived local-authority table, retain a dated snapshot for reproducible work, or use the council-ready national chart with its reporting period and source attribution intact.
Programme comparison
Progress differs sharply by remediation route
Programme rows overlap and use different eligibility and reporting rules, so they must not be added together. Each bar compares status only within that row.
ACM programme
516 buildings- Complete
- 92%
- Underway
- 4%
- Not started
- 4%
High-rise buildings with unsafe ACM; completion includes awaiting sign-off.
Building Safety Fund
640 buildings- Complete
- 75%
- Underway
- 13%
- Not started
- 12%
Eligible high-rise non-ACM buildings proceeding with an application.
Cladding Safety Scheme
1,395 buildings- Complete
- 9%
- Underway
- 19%
- Not started
- 72%
Eligible 11m+ buildings; separate pre-eligible applications are not included here.
Developer cladding defects
1,825 buildings- Complete
- 31%
- Underway
- 16%
- Not started
- 53%
Developer-reported buildings with cladding defects; overlaps with other programmes can occur.
Beyond the monitored total
The identified portfolio is not the whole problem
Government estimates and management information describe different aspects of the remediation challenge and use different reference dates.
Residential buildings 11m+ estimated to have or have had unsafe cladding, March 2026.
Estimated share of buildings expected to enter government programmes that was being monitored.
March 2025 estimate; it has not yet been updated for the March 2026 building estimate.
11m+ buildings with suspected unsafe cladding subject to local-authority Housing Act action as at 19 June 2026.
Regional comparison
Completed-remediation rate by region
Regional percentages are rounded and describe the monitored portfolio, not every residential building in the region.
How to read the tracker
Coverage and limitations matter
It is programme monitoring data
The figures combine ACM remediation, the Building Safety Fund, Cladding Safety Scheme, developer-led remediation and social-provider self-funded work while accounting for known overlap.
It is not an individual-building register
Local counts are banded. The tracker cannot tell a leaseholder whether their particular block is safe, funded or complete.
The methodology changed
From April 2026, developers report cladding and non-cladding work separately. That improved accuracy but reduced direct comparability with earlier totals.
Completion needs context
Government totals can include completed work awaiting building-control sign-off. Building owners should retain scheme, design, completion and FRA evidence for their own block.
For journalists, councils and researchers
Reuse the figures without losing their meaning
The permanent tracker and local-authority profiles are designed to keep the reporting period, source and limitations beside the number. Link to the live profile for readers and retain the dated archive used in your analysis.
Council and scrutiny papers
Use the authority profile and SVG chart, while explaining that building totals are bands and local percentages are rounded.
News reporting
State “monitored buildings” rather than implying the dataset contains every affected building or a list of addresses.
Research and comparison
Download the CSV or JSON and preserve the snapshot date. Do not infer exact counts from a published band.
Attribution
Credit MHCLG as the underlying data creator and Fire Safety Services for this derived presentation, then link to the relevant page.
Monthly change record
What changed in this tracker
Source refreshes and changes to this derived product are recorded separately so a reader can distinguish remediation movement from a presentation change.
June 2026 official release
- Updated the national portfolio to 4,469 monitored buildings.
- Updated all 67 published local-authority profiles and their downloadable histories.
- Rebuilt current, archived and reusable chart files from the same source dataset.
Citation product and permanent local profiles
- Published reusable CSV and JSON files, a dated archive and council-ready SVG charts.
- Added permanent profiles for every local authority represented in the published over-10-buildings dashboard view.
- Added copyable citations, a visible methodology, reuse guidance and an update record.
Reproducible citations
Archived monthly snapshots
The current downloads will change when a later government release is incorporated. This archive preserves the dated dataset used by existing reports and links.
67 local authorities · national, programme and regional context · CSV and JSON
For responsible persons
Manage fire risk while remediation is planned or underway
Remediation status does not suspend Fire Safety Order or Building Safety Act duties. The responsible and accountable persons should keep the external-wall evidence, FRA, safety case and interim arrangements aligned as information and site conditions change.
- Record the external-wall evidence and specialist limitations
- Review the FRA when risk information, evacuation strategy or work changes
- Control temporary fire loads, access, alarms and escape routes during work
- Communicate proportionately with residents
- Keep completion, commissioning and building-control records
Frequently asked questions
Cladding remediation tracker FAQs
Does this tracker list individual buildings?
No. The government publishes aggregate programme and local-authority data. Local building counts are banded where necessary to avoid identifying individual blocks.
Does completed remediation mean building control has signed off the work?
Not always. The government completed category can include buildings awaiting building-control sign-off. Check the building’s own records for its exact status.
Why can totals change between releases?
Buildings enter, leave or transfer between programmes, duplicated records are reconciled and reporting methods change. April 2026 introduced separate developer reporting for cladding and non-cladding defects, affecting comparisons.
Is every unsafe-cladding building in this dataset?
No. It covers buildings monitored through specified government programmes and reporting routes. The department estimates that more buildings require remediation than are currently monitored.
Does remediation replace the fire risk assessment?
No. The responsible person must keep the FRA current, consider the external wall and manage interim precautions and other fire-safety risks throughout the works.
London and Surrey support
Ask about fire risk in your block
Tell us about the premises, external-wall information and current remediation stage. Your enquiry can be reviewed and passed to a relevant provider.
Data source and method
June 2026 MHCLG release
This is an independent re-presentation of government management information under the Open Government Licence v3.0. It is a dated snapshot, not live building-safety advice. The national combined portfolio accounts for known programme crossover; programme rows must not be added together.
Local-authority profiles reproduce the dashboard view for authorities with more than 10 monitored buildings. Exact local totals are protected by published bands, and status percentages are rounded. Fire Safety Services calculates only the residual not-started/in-programme share and does not estimate a precise building count.
Accessible release · Technical note · Government dashboard
How to cite or reuse this tracker · Browse all data resources
Source period: 30 June 2026 · Government publication: 29 July 2026 · Derived product updated: 25 August 2026