EHC Quality Sub-Committee Feedback to EHC Board 12 September 2017 Susan Jones

Terms of Reference To consider the quality mark model proposed to the Each Home Counts Implementation Board and other existing models. Provide recommendations and advice on the purpose, scope, evaluation criteria and governance arrangements for the quality mark. Make formal recommendations on next steps at EHC Implementation Board meeting in October 2017.

Principles that we endorse The scope of EHC should expand beyond energy efficiency and renewables to the wider domestic repairs, maintenance and improvement market. The two-tier framework whereby installers join via a scheme The importance of government endorsement We broadly agree with the QM framework that has been presented to the board

Meetings with government endorsed standards operators MCS / RECC* MCS discussion was based on post-novation status Strong attributes: MCS standards MCS Installation database Significant membership funding (£7M) Robust, independent consumer protection offered through RECC Considerations: Timings for novation would be too slow for EHC (ECO regs) Unclear on exact future relationship with government Remit is renewable energy and low carbon tech only *A follow up conversation was had with RECC

Meetings with government endorsed standards operators Competent Person Scheme Strong attributes: Close liaison between government and industry Cover a significant proportion (>80%) of building sector Excellent data collection process – 6M notifications in LABC hub Considerations: Remit is the Building Act and is not in a position to expand to include wider quality or consumer protection issues Does not have remit / capacity to audit directly – UKAS audits schemes, who audit firms

Meetings with government endorsed standards operators TrustMark Strong attributes: Close liaison between government and industry Official government endorsed standard 30 scheme operators across the RMI market Developed LABC hub with CPS schemes – 6M notifications Considerations: Limited profile in renewables market Capacity to take on larger enforcement role Need to increase membership to achieve critical mass Ability to offer independence for the Customer Charter

Views at this stage We didn’t feel that any organisation had the capacity or complete skills at this stage to deliver the full framework. There needs to be greater emphasis placed on enforcement and consumer protection, possibly with the latter separate to the technical aspects. A collaboration focusing on different areas of expertise would be beneficial with some elements being procured if need be, e.g. audits.

Areas for discussion with the Board What level of independence is required for the customer charter be upheld? Who is best placed to carry out audits and enforcement, the schemes or overall service organisation? How can the renewables market be incorporated into the proposed model, without standards falling? What are the next steps to take?