Two worked retrofit funding assessments showing how we build an eligibility case, plus projects delivered by our founder: six site decarbonisation surveys under the LASER Zero Carbon Fund programme for the London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham (2024–2025), and a PAS 2035 external wall insulation quality review covering 270 properties in North Wales (2026).
The two assessments below are worked examples, built to the Warm Homes: Social Housing Fund Wave 3 requirements and shown at full depth so you can judge the method before you engage us. Client names, stock profiles and figures are composites, so no private client information is disclosed. The eligibility logic, the rules tested and the evidence standard are exactly what we apply to a live application.
| Assessment | Homes | Programme value | Modelled award | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Housing association, East London | 420 | £6.32m | £3.10m | Eligible and application-ready |
| Local authority landlord, Outer London | 760 | £11.80m | £5.55m | Eligible and strongly competitive |
Eligibility means a project may apply. It does not guarantee an award. Competitive strength, evidence quality, budget availability and the funder's final decision remain separate considerations. Award values shown are modelled, not confirmed grants.
Location: East London · Client type: Registered provider · Route: Warm Homes: Social Housing Fund Wave 3 · Outcome: Eligible and application-ready
A registered provider managing around 6,800 homes identified 420 occupied social homes with poor thermal performance, high heating demand and recurring reports of cold, condensation and mould risk. Starting stock was 310 EPC D and 110 EPC E, against a target of EPC C or better. The provider had £3.22 million of its own funding available and needed the programme to be deliverable without displacing essential repairs and building-safety spending.
Two criteria came back as pass with action, not pass: 43 EPC certificates needed refreshing before the evidence would stand up, and the procurement route needed final tender approval and price validation. Both were fixable in weeks. Neither would have been visible from the programme summary alone, and either could have undermined the application at assessment.
| Eligibility criterion | Result | Evidence reviewed | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eligible applicant | Pass | Registration status, ownership records, organisation accounts. | Eligible social housing landlord in England. |
| Eligible homes | Pass | Tenure records for all 420 properties. | All properties are existing social housing within the project boundary. |
| Starting EPC | Pass with action | 310 EPC D and 110 EPC E records; 43 certificates required validation. | Stock meets the below-EPC-C requirement, subject to refreshed evidence. |
| Minimum scale | Pass | Confirmed schedule of 420 in-scope homes. | Exceeds the 100-home threshold. |
| Performance outcome | Pass | RdSAP modelling and archetype-level option appraisal. | Every home modelled to reach EPC C where reasonably practicable. |
| Eligible measures | Pass | Measure schedule, surveys, design assumptions, cost plan. | Measures improve dwelling energy performance and are technically linked. |
| Co-funding | Pass | Board approval and budget allocation of £3.22 million. | Provider contribution represents 50.9% of eligible project costs. |
| Delivery standards | Pass | PAS 2035 roles, TrustMark route, quality plan. | Compliant delivery and assurance structure established. |
| Procurement | Pass with action | Procurement strategy, programme, draft evaluation criteria. | Route credible but required final tender approval and price validation. |
| Resident protection | Pass | Engagement, safeguarding, access and complaints plans. | Resident impacts and vulnerable-household needs addressed. |
Location: Outer London · Client type: Local authority landlord · Route: Warm Homes: Social Housing Fund Wave 3 · Outcome: Eligible and strongly competitive
A local authority landlord responsible for more than 12,000 council homes developed a programme for 760 EPC D and E homes across six low-rise estates built between the 1950s and 1980s: a mixture of solid-wall houses, cavity-wall homes and low-rise flats. Residents reported high energy costs, cold external walls and recurring condensation. The authority needed grant support to accelerate improvements without disrupting its wider capital programme.
Archetype modelling showed 742 of the 760 homes reaching EPC C. The remaining 18 needed further design work and, if they could not reach the target, a documented reasonable-practicability exception. Handling those 18 homes explicitly, rather than quietly averaging them into the total, is the difference between a claim a funder trusts and one they probe.
| Eligibility criterion | Result | Evidence reviewed | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eligible applicant | Pass | Local authority ownership and housing-revenue-account records. | Eligible social housing landlord in England. |
| Eligible homes | Pass | Asset register, tenancy records, estate schedules. | All 760 homes are existing council-owned social housing. |
| Starting EPC | Pass | 548 EPC D and 212 EPC E records, checked against the asset database. | Every funded home starts below EPC C. |
| Minimum scale | Pass | Property-level schedule covering six estates. | Pipeline comfortably exceeds the minimum project size. |
| Performance outcome | Pass with action | Archetype modelling: 742 homes reaching EPC C, 18 requiring further design. | Target credible, with a technical-evidence plan for constrained homes. |
| Eligible measures | Pass | Whole-house option appraisals, survey evidence, measure-cost schedules. | Measures appropriate and connected to identified defects. |
| Co-funding | Pass | Cabinet and housing-capital approvals totalling £6.25 million. | Authority contributes 53.0% of eligible project expenditure. |
| Cost and value | Pass | Benchmarking, cost-plan review, estate-level benefit modelling. | Demonstrated cost control and measurable resident outcomes. |
| Delivery capability | Pass | Programme team, procurement framework, governance, mobilisation plan. | Roles, approvals and delivery controls clearly established. |
| Resident engagement | Pass | Estate engagement plan, equality assessment, vulnerable-person support. | Resident needs, disruption and consent risks addressed. |
The assessment does not rest on a single percentage. It tests mandatory eligibility first, then evaluates evidence quality, delivery readiness, financial credibility and competitiveness as separate questions.
Applicant, property tenure, location and current funding-round status.
Every mandatory rule taken from the official scheme guidance, not from memory or precedent.
Each rule matched against your information and a specific named supporting document.
Pass, fail, pass with action, or human review. No requirement left ambiguous.
Strengths, weaknesses, missing documents and delivery risks, stated plainly.
An improvement plan sequenced by what most improves the application, before submission.
Official guidance and evidence rechecked immediately before the application goes in.
The worked assessments above are modelled on the Warm Homes: Social Housing Fund Wave 3 requirements, including eligible social housing below EPC C, the expected EPC C performance outcome, application scale, co-funding, delivery standards and evidence requirements. The Wave 3 application window is closed; we assess against whichever round is currently open.
Location: North Wales, Exposure Zone 4 (very severe) · Scope: 270 traditional solid-wall dwellings · Role: Retrofit quality & compliance review
External wall insulation on traditional solid-wall housing in a very severe exposure zone is one of the highest-risk retrofit measures in the UK. Across the 270-property scheme, recurring defects were putting performance, durability and compliance at risk: render discolouration and fungal growth, thermal bridging from discontinuous insulation, cold spots around openings, and water-ingress pathways at sills, base tracks and flashings.
This review demonstrates exactly what a competent Retrofit Coordinator brings to a large-scale EWI programme: detecting systemic quality failures early, tying every defect to a specific compliant detail, and preventing installations from requiring remedial render or insulation replacement, protecting the guarantee, the funding compliance and the residents.
Each survey combined a physical site inspection, metered energy analysis, fabric U-value and heat-loss calculation, and a costed, ranked set of carbon-reduction options , supporting the borough's strategy of reaching net zero by 2030.
A multi-building primary school with significant fabric losses and gas-fired heating. The whole-site plan combines internal wall insulation, roof and glazing upgrades, a low-temperature heat pump and solar PV, cutting emissions 75% and eliminating on-site fossil fuel reliance. 538,705 kWh and 97.1 tCO₂e saved per year; 2,516 lifetime tCO₂e.
Fabric-led plan including 1,512 m² of internal wall insulation (11% cut in total building heat loss), glazing replacement cutting glazed-surface heat loss by 28%, LED lighting, heat-pump conversion and a district-heating connection assessment.
Air-to-water heat pump and solar PV package saving 22,400 kWh and 4.0 tCO₂e per year with a net annual running-cost saving. 80.9 tCO₂e saved over measure lifetimes for a £63,000 investment.
A tightly-scoped, high-value intervention: air-to-air heat pump with supplementary electric heating, saving 12,000 kWh/yr with a 39% emissions reduction, evidence that decarbonisation does not always require major capital works when the analysis is done properly.
A landmark theatre with a 416 kW design heat load, complex occupancy and heritage constraints. The survey assessed heat-pump conversion, solar PV, lighting upgrades and district-heating options, a pathway that respects the building's operational and architectural constraints.
Heat pump and solar PV plan that fully removes on-site fossil fuel use, with the site modelled to become a net exporter of clean electricity in summer months.
| Measure | Energy saved (kWh/yr) | CO₂e saved (t/yr) | Project cost | Lifetime tCO₂e |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Internal wall insulation | 112,917 | 20.6 | £582,800 | 721.5 |
| Flat roof to pitched (rafters) | 23,001 | 4.2 | £52,119 | 126.0 |
| Pitched roof (loft) | 35,077 | 6.4 | £22,778 | 172.9 |
| Glazing upgrade | 111,420 | 20.3 | £381,600 | 569.5 |
| Heat pump (low temp.) | 224,673 | 39.0 | £610,785 | 780.7 |
| Solar PV | 31,616 | 6.5 | £56,511 | 145.8 |
| Total | 538,705 | 97.1 | £1,706,593 | 2,516.4 |
Figures are taken from the published survey reports; savings shown are modelled annual and lifetime values from the recommended-measures analysis in each report. Full reports available on request, subject to client permissions.
Most are not, and the gaps are usually small, specific and fixable. Tell us about your stock, your funding position and your deadline, we'll tell you the smallest first step.
Book a free scoping call