Building standards - compliance plan manager role: development of scope

1. Introduction

1.1 The case for a new compliance plan approach

1. In recent years, the UK has experienced several high-profile building failures and tragedies that experts note could have been prevented if appropriate building regulations and standards had been followed.

2. Since opening in 2008, structural problems at the DG One leisure centre in Dumfries and Galloway led to its complete closure in 2014. In January 2016, an outer wall collapsed at Oxgangs Primary School in Edinburgh, following which an independent inquiry into the construction of Edinburgh schools, led by Professor John Cole, identified a number of failings including (but not limited to) poor construction and inadequate supervision.

3. The inquiry concluded that changes to models of procurement of public buildings, driven by a desire for greater efficiency and an unachievable desire to transfer all risk away from the client, have unfortunately not appreciated the need to build into these models the essential provision of an appropriate level of independent scrutiny. It added that clients, particularly public sector clients with statutory duties in relation to the communities they serve, cannot simply delegate away from themselves the responsibility of putting in place an appropriate level of informed, independent scrutiny to ensure the safety of building users. By independent scrutiny, the inquiry was referring to inspection by individuals or organisations appointed by or directly employed by the client who are independent of the project company or contractor undertaking the project.^[1]

4. In June 2017, the tragic Grenfell Tower fire in London led to Dame Judith Hackitt’s independent review^[2], which concluded that the building regulations in England were ‘broken’ and that a complete overhaul was needed of the regulations, guidance and compliance processes.

5. In the wake of these events, the Scottish Government convened a Ministerial Working Group (MWG) on building and fire safety to oversee regulations and guidance, reviews of building and fire safety frameworks and related matters, with the intention of protecting the public and ensuring a high level of safety within all buildings in Scotland.

6. Two expert review panels were established. The Review Panel on Fire Safety (chaired by Dr Paul Stollard) concluded in its report^[3] that the status and limitation of existing guidance needed to be made clearer. This panel also proposed changes to certain standards, including the extension of automatic fire suppression systems to additional building groups, and reducing the height at which certain building restrictions are enacted, from 18 metres to 11 metres.

7. In parallel, the Review Panel on Compliance and Enforcement explored the strengths, weaknesses, and potential changes that could be made to existing arrangements. Chaired by Professor John Cole, the panel concluded^[4] that the existing system in Scotland had several strengths – notably the pre-emptive aspect to obtain a building warrant, which was recognised and commended in the Hackitt Review following the Grenfell Tower tragedy.

8. The panel reported shortcomings and made several recommendations, including the proposed introduction of pre-assessments and development of comprehensive Compliance Plans (CPs) for higher risk and more complex categories of buildings. The report also said consideration should be given to the introduction of a Certification of Compliance scheme which would require such certificates to be signed by an appropriately professionally qualified and registered person who would be independent from the contractor.

9. A consultation^[5] in 2018 sought views from stakeholders relating to building and fire safety regulatory frameworks. The consultation covered the roles and responsibilities of individuals undertaking verification, inspection and certification work to strengthen enforcement of building regulations; to examine specific fire safety standards relating to external cladding and cavities, escape routes and sprinkler provision; and the proposal of a central hub for verifying complex fire engineered solutions, especially for high-rise domestic buildings.

10. Respondents to the consultation largely accepted the Scottish Government’s proposals^[6], following which the Building Standards Futures Board was formed in 2019, and, in turn, the Compliance Plan Working Group to direct a new Compliance Plan Approach. This included outline proposals for a new Compliance Plan Manager (CPM) role to oversee projects and ensure compliance from start to finish in relation to high-risk building types (HRBs).

11. For context, it is worth noting from the Scottish Government’s High Rise Inventory 2020 Summary Report^[7] identified more than 700 high rise buildings with a height above 18 metres in Scotland, housing more than 46,000 flats. Almost half (46 per cent) were completed in the 1960s and 48 percent in Glasgow.

1.2 Development of the CPM role

1. In November 2021, the Scottish Government launched a consultation^[8] on a range of proposed compliance and enforcement measures. These covered the extent of agreement with the proposed CPM role; its intended independence from the contractor; timing of appointment of the CPM no later than pre-application stage; and whether a standardised competency framework for the CPM role should be developed by professional bodies and industry. The consultation also covered the definition and scope of HRBs, notably buildings over 11 metres in height, along with educational, community, sport and non-domestic public buildings under local authority control; hospitals; residential care buildings; and low-rise volume house building sites. It proposed the involvement of a CPM and CP for HRBs falling into the category of conversion, alteration or extension, in addition to new builds.

2. The consultation analysis^[9] identified greater than 80 per cent agreement on each proposal relating to the scope of the CPM role; and at least 74 per cent agreement on each of the proposed scope of HRBs (with the exception of low-rise volume house building, which yielded 36% agreement). Respondents largely felt that the introduction of the CPM would help to ensure greater compliance with the building regulations, including better compliance in the case of HRBs; identify significant risk areas as soon as possible; lead to improvements in safety for all building occupants; help to mitigate any conflicts of interest due to the role’s proposed independence; ensure improvements in the current construction and approval process; and strengthen standards and consistency across Scotland through a standardised competency framework.

3. The Scottish Government has proposed that the new CPM role should be appointed by the Relevant Person (RP) – typically the building owner – no later than pre-assessment stage on all HRB projects. Under the Building (Scotland) Act 2003, the RP has the legal responsibility to ensure compliance. Accordingly, the RP must ensure appropriate checks and supervision are put in place to provide the necessary assurances to facilitate the competent submission of a Completion Certificate to the local authority building standards verifier at the end of the project for acceptance/rejection.

4. In discharging their duties, the Scottish Government has proposed that the CPM should:

• Act in a coordinating role to support the verification role or to support checks by the verifier;
• Develop and manage a project CP for approval with building warrant plans, which shall be based on the Compliance Handbook (CHB) – an onward iteration of existing national guidance (Verification During Construction) used by verifiers at present to inform existing Construction Compliance Notification Plans (CCNPs);
• Ensure the CP covers both technical and procedural compliance (latterly ensuring inspections have been enabled at the correct time and work has not proceeded beyond approval);
• Collate evidence of compliance, provided by those responsible for the work directly, throughout the project and at the completion stage, to support and provide greater assurance that the work as undertaken is in line with the building as designed and approved;
• Work collaboratively with all those involved in the delivery of a building project, including (but not limited to) the designer and contractor (as appropriate and subject to procurement arrangements);
• Ensure that evidence documents to inform construction compliance, as set out in the CP, have been collated and that all inspections are facilitated; and
• Ensure the CP is fully discharged from building warrant pre-application discussion stage through to the competent submission of the Completion Certificate to the verifier.

5. Research carried out by Optimal Economics^[10] identified a range of advantages and possible disadvantages of introducing the proposed CPM role. A cost-benefit analysis revealed that the likely benefits of introducing the role would exceed expected costs, often by a substantial amount. The research also identified non-monetised benefits to be gained from the CPM role, including social benefits such as reduced stress and anxiety; and benefits associated with reduced costs for the emergency services, other investigative work and public inquiry/legal costs depending on the nature and severity of the building failure.

6. The same research noted the difficulty of being precise about the staff resource required for the CPM role given substantial variations in the nature and complexity of high-risk buildings. Stakeholder engagement for that research suggested that the role would likely equate to less than one full-time equivalent (FTE) per project, although some very complex projects may require more than a single full-time commitment (e.g. large hospitals).

7. On very complex projects, there may be a need for a multi-disciplinary team to cover the CPM responsibilities implying a co-ordinating aspect to the role. It was suggested that the role sounded analogous to the Principal Designer as set out in the Construction Design and Management (CDM) regulations and that the fees for the Principal Designer usually equate to 0.5% to 1% of construction costs.

1.2 Research aims

1. In August 2022, the Scottish Government commissioned Pye Tait Consulting to build on existing proposals for the CPM role and duties, drawing on expert discussions with relevant professional and industry bodies, in order to: formulate the role; understand the market and insurance needs; and develop and agree on supporting tools and guidance to aid its implementation. This includes:

(1) Developing and reaching broad consensus on:

• The role and responsibilities for the proposed CPM so that it functions consistently across Scotland (noting duties that are in and out of scope of the role); and
• Required competences, underpinning qualifications and experience.

(2) Establishing:

• The market for professionals who could fill the role;
• Liability of the role, with reference to similar roles in other industries, as appropriate;
• Availability of sufficient Professional Indemnity Insurance (PII) cover; and
• Whether PII should be mandated in legislation.

(3) Scoping out, developing and agreeing on:

• Outline content and considerations that should go into the CHB;
• Outline content and a case for setting up a professional CPM register, including auditing provisions;
• Proposals that could be used to inform a national framework for the role and to submit to national standards bodies, e.g. the BSI; and
• Practicalities and risks associated with how the CPM role is introduced.

1.3 Conceptual considerations

1. In developing the CPM role and associated tools, it is important to consider the following:

• The CPM role description and responsibilities should be clear, unambiguous, and robust to ensure widespread and sustained buy-in from all actors in the building standards system;
• The role should be articulated in a form that can be easily adopted and adapted (e.g. as a national job role template);
• The degree of flexibility needed to embed the role based on local market conditions, for example by distinguishing between core and additional responsibilities; mandatory versus desirable qualifications and experience, as well as the potential available market for CPM role-holders;
• Practicalities and risks associated with implementing the CPM, such as current appetite and any concerns among professionals about taking on the role; fee considerations; likely workloads and opportunity costs involved (such as any trade-offs and capacity to act as agents for other customers of the building standards system); and the practicalities of being independent, including the risk of conflicts of interest emerging and possible mitigation measures.

2. In parallel to this research, the Scottish Government is undertaking separate research to consider the effects of the new Compliance Plan approach on verifiers’ compliance resources and capacity, hence these aspects are out of scope for this study.

1.4 Methodology

1. The project was guided by a small Professional Body Group (PBG) comprising of randomly selected representatives from professional and industry bodies. The PBG met twice (virtually) during the project – in the scoping stage and then for a second time to review and validate the draft outputs. The PBG Terms of Reference, along with the names of participating organisations, can be found in Appendix 1.

2. The methodology also involved:

(1) A rapid evidence review of relevant Scottish Government commissioned reports, consultation documents and findings, standards and competence frameworks, to inform the following:

• Draft overarching CPM role description;
• Initial longlist of responsibilities (duties);
• Indication of likely qualifications, competences (skills and knowledge elements) and experience to be later honed and determined as either essential or desirable.

(2) A detailed review of existing related job roles from which CPMs would potentially be appointed, such as chartered built environment professionals (architects, building/fire engineers, surveyors etc.) and compliance-related roles, to identify the responsibilities, qualifications, experience and competences (skills and knowledge) associated with those roles.

This involved:-

• Sampling 25 job adverts/career information sources;
• Extracting relevant data into a spreadsheet to produce a comparability matrix; and
• Mapping content to provisional/draft proposals for the CPM role as articulated by the Scottish Government, to inform and strengthen early development of the CPM job role.

(3) In-depth stakeholder interviews x 34, spanning:

• 7 x professional bodies (one of which is also a certification scheme provider);
• 2 x industry representative bodies;
• 2 x certification scheme providers (additional to above)
• 9 x local authority verifiers;
• 8 x industry professionals;
• 3 x insurance industry representatives;
• 3 x wider built environment stakeholders.

3. Analysis of the detailed review of existing job roles is presented in Appendix 2.