Hub research sets out what successful retrofit looks like

New research from the North East and Yorkshire Net Zero Hub sets out how local areas can deliver the most successful retrofit projects.

Almost 8000 homes across the North East and Yorkshire have received energy efficiency improvements under government schemes since 2020, and the independent study – undertaken by analysts Steer – was instigated to give stakeholders a better understanding of project delivery on the ground and set out the lessons learnt after five years of retrofit programmes.

The research was launched at the Hub’s second annual conference in Sheffield on November 5^th 2024.

It was made up of interviews with close to 500 people including:

• Home owners and occupiers
• Contractors
• Local authorities

Retrofit involves introducing new materials, products and equipment into existing buildings to reduce their energy use.

Residential buildings account for 30% of the UK’s energy demand and as much as 25% of its carbon emissions. Almost 60% of homes in England were built before 1965 when thermal insulation was first required and as much as 85% today’s homes are expected to still be occupied in 2050.

The report finds that government-funded programs – including programs administered by the Hub in the region, including Green Homes Grant LAD2, Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund 2.1 and the Home Upgrade Grant – have “injected vitality into the retrofit landscape (and) undoubtedly spurred progress in retrofit efforts”.

It also sets out a series of recommendations to ensure policy “maximises the impact of such investments and addresses the complexities of retrofitting at scale”.

The study includes a wide-ranging of findings in specific areas, including:

Tendering, bid-writing and procurement

• The Hub was “proactive in providing support and acted as a critical friend…. (offering) excellent support”
• Most Local Authorities used a delivery partner to develop bids and many felt this “enhanced the quality of their overall bid… many LAs felt they would have found it very difficult to prepare a credible bid without this due to a lack of capacity” especially as “all LAs expressed that a lack of time to develop bids was a key challenge”.
• Consortia (where “increased resource allowed the LA to swiftly commence their project and mobilise activities”) and framework agreements (“which enabled LAs to tap into a supply chain which is already well-vetted and well resourced”) were considered “of significant benefit”.
• Recommendations included:
  • Enhanced data quality and utilisation to help LAs better plan for delivery and target beneficiaries.
  • Exploration of ways to address data gaps – particular for off-grid and older properties.

Beneficiary engagement

• “Hands on” but “resource intensive” engagement with communities, such as door-knocking and in-person events, are “more impactful”.
• The most notable positive aspect cited by beneficiaries receiving measures was “free” – “many households reported they had previous looked into measures (but) funding these measures without funding support was unfeasible”.
• “Taking the time to provide beneficiaries with clear explanations around why they had been chosen and why certain measures may or may not be applicable would enhance quality of beneficiary engagement”.
• Engagement activity “generally works best when the LA is the front facing entity… stakeholders noted that making use of LA logo, reinforcing that it is a government-funded scheme and explaining why the measures were being offered were all beneficial for adding legitimacy to communications”.
• Some beneficiaries experienced lengthy waiting times after being accepted into schemes.

Delivery and installation

• Communication between the Hub and LAs in this phase was described as “excellent”.
• The process tends to be positively reviewed “when beneficiaries know what is going to happen to them”.
• Being tidy and respectful of resident’s houses is “an important mark of quality” and interactions with staff and contractors is key.
• There is a high level of household interest in solar PV where “beneficiaries tend to be well-informed of the benefits” – but other technologies, namely Air Source Heat Pumps and wall insulation “can be more challenging to explain” and there can be “high drop out rates if beneficiaries are not informed early of the extent of works”.
• Enablers of success include:
  • Good LA/delivery partner relationships
  • Good internal and external monitoring
  • Advanced training (especially retrofit co-ordinators and advisors).
• Barriers to success include:
  • Customers being resistant to measures perceived as overly intrusive – leading to drop-outs.
  • Lack of customer understanding of technical requirements, such as ventilation.
  • Lack of a consistent point of contact between LA/contractors and householders and resource limitations affecting LA ability to engage with beneficiaries.
• Supply chain challenges include:
  • Availability of skilled workers.
  • Challenging timescales
  • Evolving compliance standards

Post-installation

• Many householders found it hard to state how much they had saved as their energy bills had risen since the measures were installed.
• Beneficiaries frequently stated they felt let down by a lack of contact after installation and the lack of a named contact for aftercare was a source of frustration.

Recommendations set out in the report will be used to inform future retrofit programs.

NEY NZH Retrofit Activity Process Evaluation Final Report