Six years ago, the UK Government sponsored the development of British Standard PAS 2035. Within a year or so, adoption of PAS 2035 had become a mandatory requirement across retrofit and energy efficiency programmes in England, and some in Scotland and Wales too.

The development of the Standards stemmed from poor-quality installs in the mid-2010s, which culminated in a root-and-branch review of the sector by Dr Peter Bonfield, in what became known as the Each Home Counts Review. It was created and adopted to avoid a repeat of the poor outcomes and myriad unintentional consequences highlighted in that report.

The Standard effectively reset the clock in terms of the people to be involved in retrofit projects, the qualifications they must hold and the competencies they should have.

Cue hundreds and subsequently thousands of people enrolling on retrofit training courses. In parallel, we saw the introduction of TrustMark as the quality assurance scheme for the sector.

The question therefore is: if we’ve upskilled the people who work in the sector, and introduced a consumer protection scheme, why are we still experiencing so many poor outcomes?

How can we have 30,000 defective retrofit projects delivered under GBIS and ECO, with the Government having to provide redress? (BBC News, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8606gp4711o)

That the Government and industry have invested in training is not in doubt. Since 2020, there have now been four multi-million-pound skills programmes where Government money has been blended with contributions from employers and individuals. My own organisation has been at the forefront of this. Over 3,000 Retrofit Coordinators have gained a Level 5 Diploma, and many more have gained a Level 3 Retrofit Assessor qualification. This is an admirable turbo-charging of our skills base. And yet it is not totally adequate, for the following reasons:

a) Superficiality of Training – Far too much of the training provided has been in insufficient depth. For example, there is a long-established pathway through a short Domestic Energy Assessor course (around five days and requiring no previous experience or qualifications), followed by a Level 3 Retrofit Assessor course (typically two days). Meaning that our TrustMark schemes are accrediting Retrofit Assessors with the sum total of seven days’ training. Whereas a Retrofit Assessment is supposed to be far more in depth than EPC surveys, more aligned with a RICS-style survey than an EPC assessment. It is very clear this does not equate to competence, but under both PAS 2035 and TrustMark, it is recognised as such.

b) Quality of Training – Some high-quality provision has emerged, but in general courses and qualifications are racing to the lowest common denominator, with a focus on ease of passing and as short a route as possible to certification. Many providers offer “guaranteed passes” in plain sight, but this appears to be unchallenged by awarding bodies or Ofqual. Learners are consequently lethargic and often complacent. Many take grave offence when we tell them they’ve failed! “I attended the course – I should pass!”, they say, used as they are to the incumbent providers.

Of even more concern is the volume and nature of organisations that spring up to train retrofit professionals at the first whiff of Government funding. And worse, that the correct vetting process is not put in place by funders to check the credentials of these organisations. I have several examples of companies winning six-figure funding to train Retrofit Coordinators, with no previous experience and, incredibly, absolutely no training materials to do so. Curating, as we do, a Retrofit Coordinator course containing around 6,000 crafted learning assets and resources, it is frankly bizarre that the Government thinks organisations can develop their own version of this course adequately in just a few weeks. Some of the stories from learners seduced by “FREE” training are truly toe-curling. One thing is for sure: this is not the route to competence.

c) Accreditation – The carrot dangling before learners is not holding a certificate, but winning the golden ticket – TrustMark registration. Being a TrustMark-accredited Retrofit Assessor or Coordinator radically improves their earning potential as a result of low supply and high demand. Only such people can submit the required lodgements to the TrustMark Data Warehouse that unlock funding.

But with accreditation should come audit and strict compliance, ensuring that what these people have learnt is also put into practice. And this has been a real Achilles’ heel. One provider created a service themselves, with their coordinators becoming famous as the “pyjama coordinators”. Why? Because they never left their bedrooms, delivering a plethora of desktop retrofit coordination without ever seeing the sites! Such practice is a world away from what learners at The Retrofit Academy are taught, but was again in plain sight for many years. As educator, assessor, accreditor and service provider, these organisations could set their own standards – and now we reap what we sow.

d) A fundamental flaw in PAS 2035 – From the outset, the Retrofit Coordinator role should always have been independent of the installer or contractor. It was allowed, upon condition that declarations of conflicts of interest were made. But if the issues in the installer-led ECO and GBIS markets don’t tell us this must change, we would be sticking our heads in the sand.

What Must Be Done?

1. Incredibly, National Occupational Standards do not exist for Retrofit Assessors or Coordinators. That means every awarding body and training provider is left in the dark to define competence. The Government has the power to fast-track these Standards, and this should be a matter of the utmost urgency.
2. A professional body for retrofit professionals is an absolute must. The culture and ethics of the sector need to be fundamentally challenged. This body should also be given the power to review the training provision on offer, including the training materials and the veracity of the training.
3. Conflicts of interest in the training and accreditation of both people and companies need to be resolved.

If retrofit is to succeed, we cannot continue to tolerate inadequate training, weak accreditation, and conflicted oversight. The professionalism of our workforce must be defined by competence, ethics and independence, not shortcuts and loopholes. Retrofit professionals – it is time to raise the standard.