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

2. 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.

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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.

8. 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?