How to apply for OPE and Self & Custom-Build funding

Decorative banner with HMG and LGA logo

Applications are now closed

All applications should be co-ordinated and agreed by the OPE partnership and submitted by the accountable body for the partnership. We welcome concise, clearly structured and well-referenced proposals.

Please complete the application template, basic details form and technical annex fully, providing any other essential supporting documents. Please refer to the FAQs for what will be accepted.

Applications should be submitted to the One Public Estate team via email by 23:59 on Monday 8 November 2021.

For further advice and guidance on how to structure your application/s, please contact your regional team.

Late applications (any which are received after the deadlines stated above), either in part or full, will not be accepted.

OPE Phase 9 & self custom build bid writing workshop

Video transcript - OPE Phase 9/Self & Custom Build workshop

Chris Watts: Morning everyone, and a big warm welcome to the One Public Estate Programme Bid Writing Workshop. It's really great to see so many of you have been able to join us today, we've had over 150 Eventbrite applications which is fantastic so thank you very much. As an introduction, my name is Chris Watts and I am the One Public Estate, Regional Programme Manager for the south west region. I'll be chairing this workshop today. If we can have the first slide please Penny. The first slide sets out the workshop agenda, that includes an overview of the One Public Estate Phase Nine Funding Criteria. And the self and custom built funding criteria. The presentations will also include some top tips on how to submit a funding application that is concise, clearly structured with well referenced proposals. We will then have a presentation from the National Right to Build taskforce on the self and custom build delivery, before we move into a questions and answers sessions. You will all note that your Zoom access has been muted, please post any questions through the Zoom chat function and will pick up as many questions as possible under the questions and agenda, questions and answers agenda slot later. You'll note also that the, the workshop is also being recorded and a copy of the recording will be circulated through the One Public Estate partnership programme managers.


Next slide please Penny. As an overview, the workshop will cover the six million One Public Estate Phase Nine revenue grant funding to support cross public sector land projects. And it will also include twenty million One Public Estate capital grant funding and that is to enable the release of local authority land for the delivery of self and custom build housing. Applications for this funding will need to be submitted to the One Public Estate programme by 23:59 hundred hours on Monday the 8th of November 2021. Please note bids posted after this deadline will not be accepted. Without further ado, I will now pass you to Cath Conroy. Cath is the One Public Estate Regional Programme Manager for the North East. And Cath will lead us through the One Public Estate Phase Nine criteria and some top tips. Over to you Cath, thank you.


Cath Conroy: Okay, thanks Chris. Just to say welcome, as Chris said, to this morning's workshop. Thank you very much for attending and we look at it like we've got a really good attendance here, so that's absolutely great. As somes, some of you know, I am Cath Conroy, one of the two regional programme managers for the north east, Yorkshire and Humber and east midlands. So, I am going to run through, as Chris said, just some of the key bid criteria, some top tips and highlighting the differences this time around in this funding round. So, as Chris said the £6 million revenue funding, which we're looking for projects to support public sector, property based projects that demonstrate that critical collaboration across local, central government and the wider public sector. And just to say also, that to reiterate that our core OPE ethos, which many of you will be aware of I know, remains in that we are a locally led programme, bringing national and local public sector partners together to address shared priorities through collaborations. That's absolutely critical that collaboration element. So we want-, we're looking for projects that contribute to our core programme outputs of homes, jobs, (inaudible 03.51) reduced running costs. With a particular focus on projects which include housing benefits.


And also we have a particular emphasis in this round to seek out projects that support the government's commitment to levelling up the country. So, that could be, for example, through a project which may lead to us support creating jobs in an area of high unemployment for example. So, what can the funding be used for? It can be used to support early stage project costs such as master planning, feasibility studies. It can't be used for things such as planning application fees, legal fees, etc. In past funding rounds the funding has-, the programme has supported a number of cross public sector priorities. Such as joined up public services, such as housing, health and social care integration and such as regeneration and supporting net zero carbon ambitions. Now, look at the differences in this round, so two main differences one of which is that there is now a minimum project to order £50,000. So, it maybe that you'd want to consider packaging a number of smaller schemes together if you need to hit that £50,000 target. You might want to pack, package them together in terms of the place based, or a theme based programme of work. So in addition, programme management funding is also available. Obviously, the programme recognises the importance of robust and dedicated programme management in supporting delivery projects within partnerships.


We would however ask you to speak and discuss this, if you have an interest in it, with your regional team. So, coming onto the second and the most significant difference in this funding round, is that we'll be seeking a minimum portion of 75% sustainable grant within every bid. Now, the 75% we're looking for is across an overall partnership basis. So, it maybe that a partnership may have a portfolio of projects, which range from projects that are more than 75% sustainable grant and less. So, it's that overall thing that we'd stress, it's the overall partnership basis that is that 75% minimum portion of sustainable grant. Now, the reason for the sustainable grant, obviously as I'm sure you'll all appreciate is that we're seeking to make the very best use of public funding in terms of recycling that funding and enabling, once it's recycled, for that funding to come back into the programme nationally to then go on to be able to support future projects across the country into the future. So, that's, kind of, the reasoning behind it which I'm sure you'll all appreciate. Another difference this time around, in order to recognise the, the nature of property projects by their very nature are very complex, there's a lot of moving parts. There's a lot of partners, assets, policies, priorities, etc.


In order to recognise that, the trigger point for repayment, or recycling of that funding this time round, it linked to a trigger milestone. Rather than it being time bound to a specific date in time. So, in terms of that trigger milestone might be, say, for example, disposal of an asset. It might be a list event, it might be a co-location for whatever. So, once that trigger milestone has been hit then that triggers the recycling of funding to come back into the national programme. Also be mindful of the fact that should for whatever reason, it maybe there maybe changes for whatever reason, if that trigger milestone isn't achieved then there will be an-, there will be no expectation that the recycling of funding will come back in. Finally, it's really crucially important that there are a range of asset owners public and local, public sector partners in, involved in, in the projects coming forward and that we need to ensure that and, you, you need to ensure in your bids that you have the support of all of those asset owning partners. So, next slide please Penny. Thank you. So, just moving onto the criteria, as you will see, we, the, the criteria and we've identified the scoring. Which is going to be applied to each of the criteria. Pre-selection criteria is really important, please don't forget that.


The, the, the effective cross public sector board operation (inaudible 08.43) and all of those other things that are in there, that you'd be familiar with from previous rounds. But please, as I say, do remember that they are important and you must address them in your application form. One thing just to flag that's different I think, this time round, is that we're requiring a statement of commitment for public sector and quality duty, and that's the-, you'll find that in the application form. Again, that's really important that all of those things are addressed and included in the application form. Strategic case, 40% you'll see that that's really, really important. I can't stress enough how important it is that partners take the time to, to really think that through and really pull together a convincing and compelling case for the assessment panel to be able to show how your project supports local, regional and national objectives. Such as levelling up in particular, how the project supports creation of economic opportunities. And the degree to which it supports innovation, aligned, alignment with, as I say, local and national priorities such as net zero carbon, for example. 40%, it's a massive, massive chunk of, of, of the marks. Then the other four criteria as you'll see are of equal weighting.


So, the level of cross public sector involvement, who else is involved, who are the partners, how are they involved? What their assets are and how respectively partners will benefit from this particular project. Be very, very clear in articulating that. Again, adds value from our funding and apologies if you can hear, I've got some works just started outside, so I'll speak loudly and I do apologise if it's interfering with the sound. How does our funding help enhance? What, what would happen if our funding wasn't there? Does it in, increase the scope of, of projects, for example? Be very clear in articulating that in your bid. Value for money, what, what benefits is the public purse getting out of investing in your project, again, be very clear about the benefits that, that, that are there for the value for money that that represents. So, also confidence in delivery. So, confidence not only in even the, the, ability of your partnership to deliver. So, what have you done before to track record? How, how can you instil confidence, in your bid that the assessment panel can see that your partnership can really deliver this project? And also, the project itself. (Mw 11.22) a confidence that you can deliver this particular project and any, any work that you've done to, to be able to ensure that that's the case. So, next slide please Penny.


Thank you. So, at the application form itself, two parts. The basic details form, so that is one per partnership and that's to be submitted by the lead authority. So, that is include, to include all the details, benefits, all project details, forecast benefits, details of the partnership. And also a checklist which is actually really helpful to be able to go through just before you make your bid to make sure that you've actually picked up and you've included everything that you need to do. Secondly, an application form, looking for one per project. So, there could be one basic details form per, per partnership and there might be, underneath that, a series of individual application forms for individual projects. All the information that's required is in the application form, they're very, very straight forward. Very clear and they've got really good explanations as, as to exactly what information is required. Just picking out a couple in there in the list, the strategic case, making sure that that's the rationale, the objectives, the strategic fit, the local region innovation and that's, and that golden thread that takes you from your project to central government priorities. And how that is all aligned and linked, that's really what we're looking for. And that confidence in delivery is incredibly important. So, next slide please Penny.


Thank you. So, just some top tips to finish, so tell us your places and project story. And don't forget to answer the question that's asked, and that might sound a bit silly, but actually it's surprising the number of times that that doesn't happen and that things go off on a tangent. Be very specific and very clear that you've, you've read the, the, the question and the answer your providing hits all of those things that are being asked for. As I say, the, the application form is very clear and very helpful in terms of giving you explanations as to the kinds of things that you could include in those answers. Pre selection criteria, incredibly important, make sure that you've hit those things. So, explaining why the funding is needed, be very clear about what funding is required, (inaudible 14.00) and for what would happen if it wasn't there. Public sector partners, again, being very clear about the public sector partners involved, what their involvement is and where the benefits will fall. And that they have, they are supportive of it. Strategic programmes, again, yes you could package those together. Deliverability, make sure that you're aware and be very mindful of the fact that the assessment panel may not be very familiar with your partnership. May not be very familiar with what you've done, your successes and your track records, so make sure that you highlight that, but in a very succinct way.


Because there's a fifteen page maximum limit which you (inaudible 14.41). Innovation, what you're doing differently, how you can highlight how your project stands out amongst anything else. And additional information, keep that to a minimum. And last but very means, not least, region, regional team, here to help. And I'm sure would be happy to flex diaries and, and to provide time and space for you to, to, to provide some information for you. So, back over to Chris and I do apologise for the noise. Thank you.


Chris Watts: Thank, thank you very much Cath. We, we heard everything that you said. There was a little bit of a buzz in the background, but it was, it was good, we heard everything. And thank you very much as well for going through what's required in the, the One Public Estate Phase 9 Programme and the criteria and what's expected from all partners to deliver a successful application. There is a couple of questions on that have been posted and so I do apologise that the slides-, I should've mentioned this at the beginning. The slides will be shared with everybody as well. As I referenced, that a copy of this recording will be shared with the partnership programme managers. But for people who want other access, it will be also posted on YouTube, like it was last time. So, if I can ask you to refer to YouTube in, in several days time then you should find it on, on there. So, I'm now going to pass you to James Bridgewood. James is the Regional Programme Manager for the north west and west midlands. And he will lead us through the self and custom built criteria and top tips, over to you James.


James Bridgewood: Thanks very much Chris and, and good morning everyone. As Chris mentioned, I'm one of the regional programme managers and I sit in the office of government property side of the team. So, I'm going to run through the detail of the self and custom build criteria and requirements. This is all set out in the prospectus on our website, along with some frequently asked questions and the application forms and the annexes are all aligned with these key criteria. So, the, the overview first. There's £20 million of capital funding available to help bring forward local authority land on which self and custom build homes will be built. All English local authorities are eligible and for this round that includes all of the (mw 17.07) combined authorities and their constituent local authorities. And its any local authority land, so, so both greenfield and brownfield sites we will consider. The funding is designed to help address viability issues and a funding gap associated with abnormal costs. So, that's not an exhaustive list on the screen, but it could include groundworks or small scale infrastructure and for these self and custom build projects, could also include the servicing to the self and custom build plots themselves. Your application throughout should clearly identify the specific capital costs which you require the grant to fore.


The application must also clearly articulate why government funding intervention is required. That there's a funding gap, that there's a market failure and by market failure what we mean is that the market cannot achieve an efficient outcome. So, in the safe, in the case of self and custom build plots, that will occur where there's a need to provide remediation works, or, or infrastructure that no house builder would be able, or willing to fund to make the land suitable for housing. Equally, you as landowners will have deemed those, those, those elements too costly yourselves. And therefore a funding gap is created which leaves the site stalled with no prospect of, of being released to housing. A clear, a clear indication of market failure is when the site has been testing the market itself. However, we're not expecting that to be the case for all projects. So, think about how you can evidence by means of a development appraisal or residual valuation for instance which shows a gap that aligns with the funding you're requesting. There's great breadth and opportunity to provide self and custom build sites. So, so just a few examples of, of what we've seen come forward previously. Garage sites, car parks, former town halls, community centres, scrub land, former school sites. And, and the delivery and the tenure models vary as well.


So, we've been, seen projects that deliver affordable housing, that are community led. That partner with private sector partners, that address your self and custom build housing list. And also some projects that provide key worker housing, for instance. And, and many of the schemes are using innovative delivery models such as modern methods that, modern methods of construction and are building to high energy efficiency standards. A, a key element of this funding is that the land must be released for housing by September 2024. So, so, their, their full land release, potential land release triggers, which are, which are detailed there. And ultimately for self and custom build, this, this covers the eventuality of exchange of construct. Exchange of contracts on the first plot if none of the others are met by virtue of your project's delivery route. So, again, all of, all of those, those are, are in the prospectus and in the FAQ's and, and we'll circulate the slide pack. So, so think about which of those milestones your project will meet by September 2024. If we could move on please Penny. So, this, this slide shows that the six key assessment criteria for self and custom build. First of all, the gateway criteria, really important as, as Cath said for OPE, equally for self and custom build.


So, there has got to be capital works on local authority-owned land for which there is a clear and evidenced market failure and which enables release of the land by September 2024. All of that stuff that, that I've just described. Also, the, the project must achieve a benefits cost ratio score of one, or more. And the score of benefit cost ratio, plus non-monetised benefits of 1.5 must be reached. So, I'm going to talk about BCRs and, and non-monetised benefits in more detail shortly. The first of the, the scored criteria is value for money. And I'm going to pick up on this in a bit more detail. That's got a number of component parts, so the benefit-cost ratio, the non-monetised benefits. So, as well as gateway criteria non-monetised benefits and BCRs act as a scored part of the assessment. And in addition, the value for money includes an assessment of the gross value added per hour worked for your locality. So, so more to come on that. The next scored criteria at 30%, is the strategic case. So, here's, here what's really important to convey is, is the rationale for the project. In, in terms of both national government priorities, for instance levelling up. And in that instance we'd be keen you described the, the geographic inequality which the investment helps address. So, that could be deprivation in the locality of the housing that you're intending to release land for, for instance.


Really important also though, is, is how it addresses local priorities. So, the project's impact on place, the locality, the community and why you need capital funding now in order to accelerate the project, or to cover the funding gaps in the overall project. Applications could also show how the project will help to meet local housing requirements for the local area. How it supports local employment, how it supports local suppliers for instance. We're also really keen to promote exemplars of self and custom build delivery in a variety of different settings. So, so, think about what's special about your project and, and how your project could act as an exemplar. Moving on to the, the third scored criteria which is the deliverability assessment. So, this is about giving assessors confidence in delivery of your project and, and really importantly confidence that land will be released against those, those milestones by September 2024. There are some predetermined milestones within the application form. And they range from procurement of, of, of advice, right through to the, the land release dates. So, when you're hitting that milestone that we've discussed. And then the expected start on site for the new homes and the development ending. There is opportunity for you to include other milestones on the application forms though.


So, so please do include those other milestones as you see appropriate. In terms of deliverability the, the planning status is also a really important part of our delivery assessment. Particularly making clear where the planning is a dependency for the funding works and the land release. We'll also take into account the key risks and the mitigation which you describe. And, and there's a note there, so, so evidence of, of costed work and development appraisals will help support a number of the criteria. So, it will help evidence the gap, it will help evidence the funding need. But, but such evidence will also give confidence to assessors in the preparatory work which you've, you've already undertaken. Second to last, so at 5% there's a, there's an assessment criteria for innovation. Here, here think about how the project could be perceived, perceived as innovative or perceived as an exemplar. It could include, for example, construction techniques, modern methods of construction, for instance use of sustainable materials. Wider sustainability and environmental impact, and, and, sort of, housing that helps you on your route to, to a zero carbon ambition. Or, quality of design. But it's not just about how the homes will be built, it's also, innovation is also about your supply chains and your routes to, to, to deliver as well.


So, so, how you're going to use small to medium-sized enterprises, for instance. And finally, the, the, the sixth of the criteria is public sector equality duty. This isn't about the council's general approach to public sector equality duty, it is project-specific. So, projects which highlight a, a positive impact for people with protected characteristic and those are the characteristics that are defined by the Equality Act of 2010 who struggled to obtain, attain appropriate housing. So, examples of a positive impact could include proposals to bring forward development in areas where those with protected characteristics have disproportionately own, low ownership. Or, where they suffer disproportionately from overcrowding for instance. It could also be that the project will provide homes for those with a disability, or that cater for a specific age group. And you can also support that with evidence in terms of your housing need assessment, as, as, to why there's demand for those groups within your local area. If we can move on please Penny. Thank you. So, next up as, as promised, a bit more detail about the value for money assessment. The value for money assessment comprises three component parts. So, so first is the benefit-cost ratio which is calculated in the technical annex.


The, the benefit-cost ratio is calculated based on the land value uplift, that calculation itself happens behind the scenes in the annex, but it's driven by the housing numbers which you profile within the table in the form against each year of delivery. And, and you can see the results that that creates in terms of benefit-cost ratio. Then there's the, the assessment of additionality, at high, medium or low. Here it, it's really important that you provide a description as to why you've chose that level of additionality. So, additionality reflects the amount of development which would've occurred in the absence of fund intervention. The higher the additionality, the more dependent both the project and overall development in the local authority is to the funding intervention. So, applicants should reflect on the site-specific market failures that they've identified in their selection of additionality. And, and also provide accompanying narrative to support that. The benefit-cost ratio also takes into account any other cost to central government. So, number of you will be, be familiar with, with how these are profiled. And, and this is, these are the central government costs in achieving the same outcomes, so the land release. So, the pre-development costs. You don't need to tell us about the costs in terms of developing once the, the, land has been-, you've reached your land release trigger.


Remember the, the gateway criteria here. So, so projects must have a minimum BCR of one. So, check that when you complete the technical annex, you're, you're achieving a BCR or one or above. The second component of value for money is the assessment of non-monetised benefits. I'm going to talk a bit more about those on the next slide, but these are the economic, or social welfare benefits which the benefit-cost ratio hasn't captured. So, anything other than the land value uplift, for instance. Finally, for the third part of the assessment is the gross value added. You don't need to provide any information here, that's 10% of the value for money score. And those will be allocated based on the area's relative position in terms of gross value added, to help incorporate the government's levelling up priority into our scoring for value for money. We'll, we'll do this centrally, based on the local authority area. But you can see where your area sits by virtue of the English average on the technical annex. If we could move on please Penny. Thank you. So, more detail about non-monetised benefits now. The HM Treasury Green Book and the DLUHC, Department of Levelling Up's appraisal guidance provides more detail. But, but non-monetised benefits broadly fall into the categories listed here. We're also keen to understand any others which you consider, consider appropriate, hence the other category.


And we'll score non-monetised benefits based on the information you provide. And that is the, the impact relative to the size of the project and also the evidence. So, so, please do make sure that you provide supporting evidence for your non-monetised benefits. There, there are some examples of, of non-monetised benefits in the prospectus and the frequently asked questions, so remember that, that the categories here are just categories and you need to be more specific than, than that. But for instance, a brownfield site could have visual amenity impact for local residents. The, the site might be large, significant, vacant, in a poor state of repair. And you could provide evidence using photos and an indicative site plan to, to show that by developing the site it will remove blight for a significant number of surrounding residents. So, so that's an example of vision amenity for instance. And do also talk to your, your regional programme mangers about, about non-monetised benefits as well. And they'll, they'll be able to give you some guidance. We, we will asses your non-monetised benefits and we'll convert them into a maximum uplift of 0.5, which will be added to the benefit-cost ration score. The, the key point to remember here is that non-monetised benefits serve two purposes.


So, where your benefit-cost ratio is between one and 1.5, non-monetised benefits are essential to meet the gateway criteria. Once you've passed that gateway criteria, they can also improve your overall value for money score. And can therefore effect the project's position in the final ranked list. Projects in the last round which tended to, to receive the highest non-monetised benefit score, tended to include four to, to six NMB's per project. But, but this isn't about providing response against all of the generic categories, it's about how you can demonstrate the specific project impact and provide good quality evidence for those. So, so, please don't feel the need to, to, to, to put something against each of those categories. Think about the project itself and the, the wider social welfare benefits. Moving on please Penny. So, in terms of, in terms of how to apply, there are, there are three forms for self and custom build applications. And they're all in sections which mirror the criteria which have just been described. So, hopefully they're logical when, when you read in conjunction with the prospectus. I'm going to run through the three forms in reverse order actually, which, which is probably the easiest way for applicants to consider them. First the technical annex where you need one for each project.


I'd encourage you to put your project numbers in here first to check that your project meets the BCR gateway of one. The, the form is largely formulaic, based on your housing numbers and the amount of grants you're applying for. But, but this is also where you select your additionality, which I mentioned earlier. So, so please do make sure that, that there's an explanation of that additionality. Because assessors will, will assess that, that level of, of additionality that you've chosen and they may reduce it if, if we consider it's optimistic. Second, the application form. So, again, one per project with a limit of fifteen pages. This is largely the narrative to support your application. And it's designed to take you through each of the assessment criteria in turn, with additional guidance within the form itself as you go. With the applications, please remember to get a section 151 officer or chief executive to sign off for the local authority whose land it is. And hen finally, the basic details form. So, there is one per OP partnership and what this does is it aggregates all of the information for the projects which, which the OP partnership are going to be submitting. And as with, the, the revenue funding application and the OP funding, it contains a check list to help you just prior to submission. Moving on to the final slide, I think, Penny. So, so top, top tips.


This is, this is really just a recap of, of what I've run through, so, so some reminders. Answer the question posed with the assessment criteria in mind. We're, we're keen to understand the story but keep it concise, keep it relevant and reflect on the prospectus guidance as you go. Consider your gateway first, so as I said, strongly encourage you to run your project numbers through the technical annex. Particularly important if you're achieving a, a benefit-cost ratio around the one mark, or indeed around the 1.5 mark. So, coming onto that non-monetised benefits, remember that they serve two purposes. First as a gateway criteria where your BCR is falling between one and 1.5. They're critical there, so you should pay particular attention to them. And once past that point, so your BCR, plus NMB of 1.5, they can effect your ranking in the final list as part of the VFM assessment. So, so don't give up on NMBs once you've passed that magic 1.5. Additionality, so assessors as I said will consider your choice or high, medium, or low. And it might be adjusted if it's not considered appropriate. That in turn, can of course effect your benefit-cost ratio and whether you hit the gateway of one. So, so, I can't reiterate enough, make sure you're explaining why you, you choose that additionality assessment. Deliverability, what, what your timelines look like, what are the critical dependencies.


The, the aim of this is to give assessors confidence in delivery to those timescales. Have you identified the risks that we're spotting? Have you identified mitigation? And, and have we got confidence that, that you can release the land by September 2024. And then, finally public sector equality duty, this isn't a generic impact assessment or council policy, it's about the positive benefits which the project enables. Just, that wasn't (mw 38.38), just in terms of additional information, we'll, we'll score the criteria based on the evidence articulated within the application form. But please keep additional information relevant and to a minimum. So, reference that additional information with the application form and if you're linking, for instance, lengthy strategy documents, a housing strategy for instance. Please indicate the page number and the paragraph of relevance. So, assessors won't have time to read full strategy documents. Chris, I think that's, that's me done for the SEB overview.


Chris Watts: Thank you very, very much James, that was a really clear overview of the self and custom build criteria and what's required to deliver a successful application. At this point, can I actually encourage you all to keep posting your questions through the chat. I noticed there's a number there already, but keep posting and we will pick up as many of these as we can after our next speaker. So, I now have the pleasure to introduce to you Sally Tagg, Sally is the acting head for the National Right to Build Taskforce. And will lead the presentation on local authority, self and custom build delivery. Over to you Sally.


Sally Tagg: Thanks very much, Chris. Good morning, everybody, and I hope now that I can add a little bit more to everything that we've heard before. So, notwithstanding, Penny if you could take me to the next slide, please. I just want to touch on the government's self build action plan. And this is the first time we've seen an action plan dedicated to custom and self build. And I think that there are a number of things here on the list that are in, in play and ongoing and, and are very interesting and useful to understand. But I want to focus on the Bacon Review today which has been completed. This was an, undertaken earlier in the summer and I think that for those of you who are interested, I'd like you to focus on chapter four which is using land the public already own. And also chapter six, delivering real change that works. Both of those are interesting sections. So, have a look at those, that might well assist you. Next slide Penny, please. Thank you. I want to also, in this session, look at defining self and custom build, the government aspirations for the sector, looking at diversity, placemaking and so on to look at some of the wider benefits and obviously to take you through quickly what the right to build taskforce can, can assist you with. Next slide please Penny, thank you.


So, in terms of defining customer and self build, for those of you who are not familiar and there maybe some in the audience who needs to take a look at the legislation. We're looking at these self and custom build house building 2015 Act, those are the two sections that we see in the first bullet. But the key issue really to understand is how the Act does not distinguish between self and custom build housing. And also I think I noticed something in the chat about what, what constitutes custom and self build. It's very much about an, an element of everyone needing to be involved with other individuals, or associations, in the process holistically. So, from design stage all the way through to build stage and then subsequent occupation. That is (mw 42.09) the definition within the legislation which, which you need to be mindful of. There are a number of other elements to this in terms of different parts of legislation, secondary regulation as well, National Planning Policy Framework, for those of you who are planners. Next slide please Penny. Thank you. But I think the key message here is that the Bacon Review, which is why I'm pointing you to it, talks about a very broad church. So, we have a number of issues here, we've got National Planning Policy Framework and we've got the National Model Design Code which is quite new. All of which are salient and, and should be perhaps something that you refer to.


So, I'd like to go to the next slide now please Penny. Thank you. But I think it's really, really important as well that you are aware of the right to build duties on councils. These are statutory requirements, so this came in in April 2016 and effectively ended the 2015 Act requirements, each local authority in England needs to have a self build register. Enabling anyone within your borough or district to come forward and sign up to the register and identify themselves as parties who want to build in your area. And then the registers need to be very well publicised on your council's websites. And then local authorities need to have regard for these parties in terms of any decision making on planning, housing and land disposal in terms of your functions. And then in terms of the duty under the legislation to meet demand, obviously the numbers on the register need to be satisfied in terms of granting sufficient permissions to address the numbers of the register. And there is enough information on that particular element again within the legislation. Next slide please Penny. So, I want to have a look now at how we can determine that you are confident that your bid is a custom build project. And how, how that is addressed, so just for those of you who are perhaps new to this, custom build, self build can be, you know, different things to different people.


But self build is the DIY option, it's very much about people normally who have got an aspiration to do everything themselves, or have got skills they want to utilise. And they're effectively bringing forward their own properties with their own designs and man, managing projects through from start to finish. They occasionally will bring in contractors as well, but these are typically individual self build schemes, or schemes where there are two houses on a plot. Anyone moving onto, kind of, larger projects. Quite often we're seeing people who want to undertake their own projects, but they don't want to do the DIY option. So, they're, they're taking up the custom build routes, this is very much working with specialist developers, who effectively enable projects. So, they're helping with the design, they're helping with the delivery and all the aspects that, and everything else that needs to be undertaken. And ultimately this can then end up with multiple plot sites, where you've got service plots that are ready. Or, it could just be that a home builder is, is actually doing all of the things leading up to the actual purchase of the site and construction with the enabler. But those are two different elements to just be aware of. Can we go to the next slide now please Penny? So, I just want to touch on delivery models in a bit more detail.


I think we are aware of small sites, but we've also got larger sites where perhaps through planning policy, developers are required to deliver a percentage of housing as customer and self build. Brownfield regeneration those, those are, kind of, more routes for custom self builds. Very popular, but also greenfield land. And I'm looking now particularly at the exception sites, where authorities can bring forward land that are on the edge of settlements and towns that are sustainable sites, that actually are sites that are not of interest to bigger developers. But market housing on the premise that they're constrained by things that are not in the business model for the massive house builders. So, very much very good for custom and self build. The Shropshire model is one I'm going to talk about in a moment as an example of an exception site. I also wanted to just touch on the fact that community land trust in, and co-housing projects as well are, are of interest in terms of delivery models. I'm going to show you some examples of those in a moment. Next slide please Penny. Next slide. Thank you. So, first of all I just want to touch on Graven Hill, this is a greenfield development. I'm sure most of you may have heard of this in, in some form or other. This is a site that was purchased by (mw 47.22) District Council, it's an old MOD facility and was brought forward for custom self build in the main.


We've got a real mixture of, of different types of development on this site. And this is very much an ongoing site. If you look at the Graven Hill website you'll see a whole plethora of information which I think would be of interest to you. But really, the reason for showing you this is that this is, in England at the moment, I think our biggest custom self build site and probably now in Europe. I think we've overtaken the Netherlands. But, certainly a site to be aware of in terms of greenfield. And also, some of the issues that are raised with the Gravel Hill scheme are certainly ones that could be used on smaller developments for greenfield. Moving on please Penny. So, we're looking now at community led schemes. Now this is a co-hosing, co-housing scheme for older people and the reason I've raised this one is because this is the first senior co-housing community projects in the country. Very aspirational for a group of women who came together, who, who wanted to actually have a community supportive environment for women over 55. What was interesting about this was that they had considered open market provision. And there wasn't anything that would satisfy their needs. They felt very much they wanted to have a, a community which could all grow old together. Support each other and so very much a community issue.


But this model could be used through a CLT provision as well, this is a, an old and occupied and scheme with some social housing. Next slide Penny please? So, this is now a community led, affordable self build housing scheme. This is in Lewisham, 33 co-designed houses and flats. What's interesting about this is that this is a managed scheme by-, it was a volunteer led CLT. And a group of residents in Walson Way, Lewisham came together. They were seeking to ensure and future proof for future generations the provision of housing for those that had always lived in the, in the local area. They were basically being priced out of the market and, and unable to continue to, to, you know, move back effectively. And so as a consequence they wanted to come up with a model that would effectively lock in affordability, future proof it for other generations and on that premise come up with a simple and cost-effective build. Aspirational it itself in some respects, very sustainable and also low energy. And the link for that is at the bottom of the slide and I suggest that that would be a good one to have a look at. Moving on. Next slide please, thank you. I just want to have a quick look at a, affordable housing. So, this is, on this slide we've got two examples.


So, we've got the Shropshire Model which is basically a provision where the Shropshire Council brought forward a scheme which limited the size of the individual units and also ensured that their re-sale value was limited to 60%-80% open market value. And also ensured a local connection clause. Now, the local connection clause was really a mechanism to ensure looking after their existing communities, those who lived and worked there. But also those that had connections there and wanted to come back into the community. That was a very successful scheme and subsequently there is also the Teignbridge scheme which is on the link below, again, another one to look at. But this was a really innovative scheme of its time. This is one that the taskforce uses regularly because it's one that's really worked. Moving on please Penny. I just want to touch on some other examples of custom and self build opportunities. So, starter homes, we have, I think it's fair to say, across England, a dire shortage of first time starter homes. Many youngsters desperately looking to self build. Then the downsizes, we've also got that problem as well because of the demographic. The other one that I just wanted to point out is the shared ownership sweat equity opportunities. So, the picture at the bottom of the slide is a scheme in (mw 51.53) which was through Cherwell District Council.


And they were working with a group of young people who were wanting to get into the trade, to learn carpentry, electrician, etc, etc. And they wanted to build their own homes, using sweat equality and in the process upskill. But that was a successful scheme and one that, you know, is worth perhaps looking at as a case study. Moving on then to our next slide please Penny. So, I just want to have a look at the land release scheme, so what we've learned from the first round, the cascade approach many of-, local authorities in the first wave were taking people off their affordable housing register and delivering affordable homes with Capital A. Which is absolutely fine, but what we are also suggesting is that there is an opportunity to move to affordable housing, open market with a small A and facilitating those who, who, you know, clearly want to undertake custom self build. And moving on then to the registers, the issue that we're finding on registers is that are people joining registers who are youngsters? People who are in medium sized family homes and, to, who are trapped because they can't afford market housing to move up the ladder. And so this would be an opportunity for both those groups and because they are not in affordable housing provision and/or have lost the edge for affordable housing registers. So, we've got some parties falling between two stories there.


Between market and, and affordable. And moving on please Penny. So, why apply? I think from our perspective as the taskforce, we would say that the government clearly is seeking to demonstrate by, by this bid and this, this fund, opportunities of diversity and enabling people to actually deliver their own homes to suit their own needs. Delivering homes that are sustainable and future proof for their needs. I think the pandemic has shined a big torch on all of this and so, you know, we see that as a, an ideal opportunity moving forward. I think it's fair to say a lot of what I've said about things we've covered in previous presentations. But I would urge you to talk to your regional teams about difficulties that you might have, or, or further information that you need. And we're, as a taskforce, here to support that as well. Moving on Penny please. I just want to look at some of the benefits, and coming from a local authority background myself, I, I do understand that sometimes trying to get buy in, internally can be an issue. And so it's really looking at some of the, the opportunities for you as authorities. Clearly in communities, you know, for me, community cohesion is right up there. In terms of councils, it's about accelerating the growth of housing supply and looking at opportunities to bring the economy benefits in terms of local, small developers who have struggled in the past.


Who've got lots of skill and lots of supply chain opportunities to bring people who've actually got dedicated skills like the carpenters and people like that. Who are actually really well used in custom self build routes. The other thing as well is about fewer planning objections. Quite often when I'm dealing with neighbourhood plans, communities have a significant more buy in to custom self builds because they see this as an opportunity to facilitate people who are already in the community. Or, people who want to come back to community and downsize within communities. So, often that's a, a more acceptable route. Moving on Penny, please. I just want to re-emphasise that from the taskforce perspective we, we don't feel that you need to have experience in custom self build. In fact, we are still trying to encourage as many authorities as possible to get involved in the sector. And, and so on that basis, you know, don't let it put you off if you've not previously been involved in custom self build. This is a fantastic opportunity. In terms of policy, for those of you who are perhaps less familiar, there's a few here. So, allocated sites and criteria based support. But rather than go into detail now, if anyone wants some information regarding policies then do make contact with us and we can assist you in that respect. Moving on please.


So, I just now want to look at some top tips for evidence for custom self build. From a perspective of just focusing in on who your audience is for your bid, is it the Right to Build Register, is it the housing register? Is it community groups? Perhaps, you know, be clear on, on that, but also consider how you can make sure you provide a good level of involvement for the end user, at each of those stages that I referred to earlier. So, in terms of design and build and then ultimately occupation. Make sure that you also demonstrate with evidence how those end users are being involved in that process, that's really rather key. And that can involve a number of things, meeting notes, site visit notes, etc. But a clear audit trail that you can demonstrate is, is really, really key in this respect. And also, make sure that when the designs have been identified, that the parties who are involved in the process sign up to that, then, then you can have a, a clear agreement at that stage. Penny, if you could take me to the next slide please. So, in terms of the tips for deliverability, I think that me wearing my planning hat for a second, planning authorities and planning departments are very much part of this process at the initial stages at least. And I think early involvement with the planning department is important to get buy in through the project.


A, probably an involvement at the, at the bid stage even would be a good idea, just to warm the, the officers up in the planning departments. Also, for those of you who are looking at larger sites where a design (mw 58.34) is likely to be needed, then do drill down to some of the devil in the detail, by looking at the text in those, those documents. And how they correlate with design, imagery and diagrams, etc. Because that can also be confusing for the implementation stage, if the design (mw 58.51) aren't clearly written. Also, moving onto technical reports and documents, I think there's lots and lots of different technical reports required through the planning process to make sure that you've identified what those are. And then also moving on to make sure they're all signed off with the planning departments. In terms of contracts, I think it goes without saying that key services should be part of the contract. But make sure you've identified all of the key services. It can be a complete show stopper if, for example, sewerage is missing, or gas or electricity. Things like that can take time to resolve and delay your project. Also make sure that your main contractor is engaged with throughout the entire process. Particularly around expected dates of delivery of key infrastructure such as roads. Again, this can slow a project.


And make sure that your formal contracts are in place with all the parties, your legal team has had an opportunity to carefully set out and vet all of those contracts. And then finally, make sure that your bids are submitted in time, we've already heard about the window. And so it's a question of obviously making the best use of time going forward. Next slide Penny. Thank you. So, finally then to wrap up, in terms of the taskforce offering, we have this autumn some exciting masterclasses, these are all free to local authorities. Please do have a look at our website, the next one is the 14th of October and we're looking at design codes and (mw 01.00.28) passports. So, everything design related and we would welcome anyone wanting to join us, we still have capacity in that particular session but there are more coming, watch this space. The other thing that we also offer is a very bespoke consultancy service. I would say this and I think it's fair to say that we have a very experienced taskforce of, of experts. Which will range from all of the things that we've discussed today and more. And if anyone wants to take us up on any of those services, do feel free to contact us. We also have lots of free advice that's on our website and which we are updating regularly. So, again keep watching that and hope that that has been of interest to you. Next slide Penny. Thank you very much and I'll pass you back to Chris.


Chris Watts: Thank you very much Sally for that and thank you for the presentation. A clear definition and examples of self build and custom build delivery. And also, a big thank you for your offer to support the partners. So, I would encourage partners to take up Sally's offer on that. We are now moving into our question and answer session. Katherine Anderson, the One Public Estate Regional Programme Advisor for the north west and west midlands region. And Ama Goulden, the OPE Regional Programme Advisor for the south west have been trawling through your questions posted in the chat. And will now read out the questions and will answer or assign them appropriately. We've got about twenty minutes for this, so I will keep a timer on it. Thank you, over to you Kate and Ama.


Ama Goulden: Thanks Chris, and I'm going to kick off with the OPE line of questions along with Kath, and we've had some really interesting questions in, Kath. Quite a few on the 75% sustainable grant, so I'll start with those. The first one is, is the 75% sustainable grant element required for each project and the answer there is, no it is expected in the overall partnership bid, not each project. There's a couple now that I'll hand over to you for, Kath. So, with the sustainable grant element, can it be annotised over the ten year OPE project period for reducing running cost outputs. So, the example here is if there was £100,000 sustainable grant, could it be repaid back at 7.5, £7,500 per year?


Cath Conroy: Thanks Ama and thanks very much for that question. It's a really interesting question and I'm afraid I'm not able to provide an answer, a full answer to that here. However, I suggest we take that question back and get an answer out within the next couple of days. Unless Chris or James or any other colleagues on the call wanted to input into that. I think I would suggest that that is a good one to take back. Thanks Ama.


Mike: I can have a go at that Ama, if that's helpful.


Ama Goulden: Great, thanks Mike.


Kate Anderson: Thanks Mike.


Mike: Good, good morning all Mike Harries, I'm the Regional Programme Manager for the north west region, work, working alongside James who you heard from earlier. The approach in the past for repayment of, of the sustainable grant has been a repayment schedule can be agreed. In this, in this round because it's trigger event driven, the question will be, what, what's the nature of the trigger? Certainly, I've got a project in the last round where all of the benefits are revenue and therefore the repayment, even under the old rules, is coming in over three years. So, speak to us if you've got ideas of things that are slower repayment. But it certainly wouldn't exclude a project, would be my steer at this point. Don't, don't discount yourself, but just explain why you think it needs to be done over a given period.


Ama Goulden: Thanks very much, Mike. Sorry, (inaudible 01.04.54) yes.


Cath Conroy: Yes, that, that absolutely I would just repeat as well and just reinforce that in terms of any, any suggestions, any ideas you have, then please do discuss them in the first instance with your regional team. Thanks for that, yes, thanks Ama.


Ama Goulden: Great and then a suitably linked question, beyond the disposal of assets, what are the circumstances can you, you envisage, milestones being met that would require the sustainable grant to be repaid? We've just discussed reduced running costs which will obviously be one. I'm not sure if Cath or anyone else would like to come in with any other examples.


Cath Conroy: Thanks Ama. Well, in terms of any trigger event, we would be looking for probably something where there would be, it, the, any capital receipt would be realised, for example. Where a, a disposal of an asset, or maybe a lease event where you were, there was a termination of a lease, there was an opportunity to come out of a lease. Where that would release some, some funds through reduced running costs effectively. Or where, maybe, you was, there was a proposal to co-locate with another, a, another assets which would then free up other assets which would then again similarly release capital receipts or reduced running costs. So, that's the kind of thing that we would seek to identify as a trigger, a trigger event. I don't know if there's anybody else who wants to add, add into that, colleagues?


James Bridgewood: Cath, can I, can I add, add to that, so, so potential other scenario. Think, think about your, your route to delivery of the OPE project as, as well. So, so, in, in the same way that, when you're partnering with a, a development partner, you might seek to recoup revenue costs from that development partner that you've incurred up front. Equally, the same could be true for the, the recycled, the recycled sustainable grant. So, thinking about your, your total revenue cost and obviously OPE funding is, is one of those. What's your, what's your route to delivery that might enable recycling back into the national programme?


Ama Goulden: Thanks James and Cath. We've had a couple of questions, or people just noting the move from 25% up to 75% sustainable grant. And so thought it might be helpful if we, kind of, talk a bit about the, the, the journey and the story behind that move. One person particularly noting does this highlight a focus shifting away from the disposal of capital assets, more towards initiatives that retain capital assets but create a revenue stream? I think you're on mute Cath.


Cath Conroy: Mute, yes, thank you. Yes, and that's a really interesting question and clear that it, it is quite a significant and substantial change from previous rounds of funding. Very much as I said earlier the, the, reason behind it and the, the thinking behind this change in the, of funding model is very much to ensure that we make, maximise the impact of the public sector funding that enables us to recycle that into other projects, into, into the future so that it's enabling the programme generally, nationally, on a national basis to become sustainable to enable, as I say, that funding to come back through. And to be able to fund projects moving forward. There is, as, as Mike referred to earlier, there's a range of different ways and opportunities that that funding can come back through. Into-, flow back through and be recycled into the programme. So, again, it's very much a case of discussing individual circumstances with your regional teams. Any colleagues want to add anything onto that?


James Bridgewood: Shall I-, shall I just pick up on that shift to, to sort of revenue streams and what have you? So, I don't, I don't think this is, sort of, this is indicative of, of government shifting to that. But that your, your, again, your route to delivery and what you do with the asset, sort of, your priorities locally will determine that. And we, we've seen even under previous OPE phases a, a number of routes where assets may be retained and may, they generate a revenue stream. And in the same way you can still deliver housing, that in itself delivers a, a revenue stream. So, so it, it's not that we're, we're asking you to shift to a, a different delivery route, that, that depends on, on what your own partnership priorities are for each of the organisations.


Ama Goulden: Thanks both, I'm just conscious of time so I'm going to, kind of, skip ahead just in quick answer one and if we have time I'll, I'll come back. If one application from (inaudible 01.10.35) a project is it necessary to, necessary to put the partnership story and give a criteria in each one? The answer is yes, please. I appreciate that makes it a bit laborious but it would be greatly appreciated by the assessors. The other question about partnership programme management funding, yes, you are able to ask for that within your bid. And partnerships should discuss their plans with their OPE regional team in the first instance and just to note that sustainable grant is not available for programme management awards. There was a question about is there an acceptable percentage of grant that I'll just put out to Cath and others if you'd like to pick up on that?


Cath Conroy: Sorry Ama, could you just repeat the question?


Ama Goulden: Sorry, yes. Within programme management funding, is there an acceptable percentage of grant, so, i.e. 20% of the total grant ask?


Cath Conroy: In answer to that, that, there's no hard and fast rules. Again, we would refer you back to your regional team to have that conversation. Have that discussion. As, I think, Ama referred to earlier, the, the programme management funding is not available for, as part of the sustainable grant funding. And you'd need to discuss that, the implications of that through your regional teams.


Ama Goulden: Great, thanks very much Cath. And then two questions about the mix of local government and central government. Each project we need to have a mix of local government and central government partners. There was one question, I'm not sure if it was in relation to OPE or self and custom build, but I'll answer it from an OPE perspective and then maybe take it up from the self and custom build perspective. The question was, is it restricted to local authority own land only? What about NHS owned land for OPE? It doesn't have to be locally authority owned land as mentioned, we would want each project to have a mix of local government and central government partners. And if I've got time to sneak in one more if Chris gives me an indication.


Chris Watts: Yes, that's fine Ama, you can do another one, that's brilliant.


Ama Goulden: Great, thank you. There was a question specifically about local industrial strategies that we make reference to in the strategic case. Someone has noted that a lot of these, if they have been published, are now probably very out of date. And just what approach would we recommend there?


Cath Conroy: That's a really good question and do appreciate obviously the circumstances that a majority of local authorities are in at the moment and the rest of the public sector come to that. As, as they're coming out of the post pandemic recovery. What we would say is certainly refer to by way of background those strategies that you have in place. And I'm sure that most of the very, the vast majority of local authorities and organisations will have at least considered at least some initial post COVID recovery economic plans. So, it's kind of, it's up to you really as a partnership to, to identify which strategies, which documents, which strategic plans are most appropriate to support the individual project and indeed the, the wider improvements and strategic direction of travel. Which reflect the central government levelling up agenda, etc, innovation, zero carbon agenda, etc. I hope that, I hope that helps.


Ama Goulden: Thanks very much Cath and one final question. We make reference to partnership planning as what would happen without the funding, but can this also include what wouldn't happen without the funding. I.e. without the funding nothing would happen but a lot could happen with the funding and yes, that would be, that would be fine if anyone else has anything else they'd like to input into that? No? Great, thanks very much Chris, I will hand over to Kate.


Chris Watts: Thank you Ama. Kate is now going to pick-, Sorry, Kate you're going to pick up on self and custom build aren't you? Questions?


Kate Anderson: Yes, thanks Chris. So, hello, I'm Kate from the north west team. And so just in the first question e had was around local authority land ownership and unlike OPE which can be very central and local government owned. For the, for self and custom build it's restricted to local authority owned land. A couple of questions around levelling up, understandably and the first one was around defining levelling up. So, I'll ask James to comment on that in a moment. And how those with lower land values might meet the challenge in the BCR of reflecting levelling up and have previously struggled with lower land values in that area. James, I'm going to pass over to you for that one.


James Bridgewood: Thank you Kate. So, so in terms of, in terms of levelling up, we, we're, we're not, sort of, we're not going to provide a, a, a, definition, that, that constrains people. As, as we said earlier, it, it's about the geographic inequality. So, for instance, I think there was a question about OPE levelling up, but it would apply equally to, to self and custom build. What is it about the, the project that helps address that geographic inequality? So, so for, for, for OPE for instance, if you're delivering a, a health project or an education project, are there, are there, sort of, health inequalities in the, in the region, sub region, locality? Is there, sort of, lower educational attainment, for instance? And in the case of housing, where you're delivering housing as part of your project, that could be, for instance, that there's a pressure on affordability. So, so affordable housing pressures in, in the area. So, so this isn't, this isn't about a, a, a north south divide or a regional split, it's about articulating the case for the locality in which your project is, is, is situated. And then, in terms of the, the question about the, the economic output, so the benefit cost ratio for self and custom build projects. We, we, we recognise, we recognise the challenge, we recognise that a gateway BCR of one is, is still a struggle in a, in areas of lower land value uplift.


What, what, what we've done through, through the previous and, and this current round is introduced non-monetised benefits. So, so once you get past that, that BCR of one, please do con, consider those. And, and how you can, you can get to the, the 1.5 and a maximum score with your BCR plus non-monetised benefits. And then in terms of the BCR of one, I, I'd really encourage you to, to, to sort of, to play with the technical annex. So, so, the number of housing, the, the profile of your housing and also the, the amount of grants that you're requesting, all effect that, that benefit cost ratio, as your, as your, as does your additionality. So, so think about the, the impact of those inputs on BCR and do also, sort of, we, we in the regional teams are very happy to run through, sort of run through those with you. To see where there might be opportunity to, for you to make an application.


Kate Anderson: Thanks James so focused on NMB's and testing the technical annex is what I took away from that. Mike, would you want to add anything on levelling up, or shall we move on? Yes. Right, the next question we have was around the definition of self and custom build and we have got a set definition that's on FAQ of the website. And the question was specifically around the role of the occupier and using that as counting the definition of self and custom build. And in the definition there is some flexibility, there's not an exhaustive list. But, we do take into account the role of the owner in design and layout of the original scheme. So, if you refer to that on the FAQ. Any other input there, James?


James Bridgewood: I think that, so, spotting that, that question about occupier input on, on design specification. So, it's, it's got to be more than, sort of, the, the input on design that, that you'd have at sort of choosing a home off plan. So, so it's not about, it's more than, sort of choice of the, the fittings and, and the, the decoration and, and the kitchen, for instance. But, but the, as Kate says, the, the FAQs have got a bit more detail and, and again, sort of, encourage you to talk to your regional teams about how, how you meet that SCB or custom build definition. Thanks Kate.


Kate Anderson: Thanks James. And we have another round, another question on if an options analysis is needed to substantiate additional economic benefits. And for self and custom build, supporting information should provide evidence to market failure and additionality scores. And you can also provide additional evidence that you think will support the case of economic benefits. Sally mentioned some of those in her presentation which we can pick up off line via Sally. Was there any addition, additional to add there James?


James Bridgewood: Agree, agree with all of that Kate. I mean, an option, sort of, an option analysis could be the evidence you, you provide, but it's by no means absolutely necessary. So, so we wouldn't, we wouldn't anticipate that all projects have got options analysis to, to indicate their wider social welfare benefits at this stage.


Kate Anderson: Thanks James. And then that brings us onto our final self and custom build question. In using the self and custom build register, how can we demonstrate end user consultation if we don't know who the end user will be? I think possibly this might be one for the expertise of Sally. We could take that outside of the meeting, given the time. But does anyone want to comment, comment on that James? Or?


James Bridgewood: I think, I think my initial, initial reaction to that is that the, the register identifies your, your need for, for self and custom build plots in the, in the locality. It doesn't actually provide evidence that, that occupiers will be influencing the design. That, that is dependent on your, your route to market, and your, your delivery route, if that makes sense? So, given, given that, that land has to be released by September 2024, we, we would expect applicants to, to be able to articulate how that land is going to be released and the route to those ultimate occupiers. So, so that's, that's where you'd get the, the, the evidence that it is a self or custom build plot.


Kate Anderson: Thanks James and just one final question around issues with duplicate funding. For self, self and custom build sites. I believe they work in conjunction together? Does that reflect your understanding?


James Bridgewood: That's, yes, that's correct, so within the technical annex, there is opportunity for you to detail the, the other government funding, central government funding that's going into, into the site that takes it up until the point of land release. So, so for, for this funding there's, there's, there's no issue with other government funding going in there. It will depend on the terms of your funding agreements that you've got for other public funding. So, you'll want to check, check that. But, yes, just, just make sure you're profiling it within your, your technical annex, because it effects the benefit cost ratio.


Kate Anderson: Yes, absolutely, thank you, I'll pass back to Chris.


Chris Watts: Thank you very much Kate and Ama, for, for leading that session and thank you for Cath, Mike and James for responding to some of the questions. So, we've now come into the end of our workshop. I just want to say thank you for all the questions posted and I do appreciate that we didn't answer all the questions, or all the questions weren't selected. What I can say is that all the questions that have been posted today will be collated and any questions that have not already captured on the local government, the social website, under One Public Estate, frequently asked questions, will be added to the document after the workshop. I hope you've all found the workshop useful today and it has provided you with the information required to submit a successful partnership funding application. If you have any further questions or potential project opportunities, then please contact your regional programme teams. Every presentation we've heard today, they've referenced the regional programme team, so please contact. You will see them on the, this slide here. If in any doubt, look at the One Public Estate LTA website and there, the, the names of the, and the telephone numbers and the email addresses of the contacts are on that website. I'd like to say a big thank you from myself to Cath and James for leading us through One Public Estate and self and custom build funding application criteria.


To Kate and Ama again for fielding the questions and in particular Sally Tagg from the National Right to Build Taskforce for leading us through some great examples of self and custom build delivery. But finally, thank you for attending the workshop. As a One Public Estate programme, we are really looking forward to receiving your One Public Estate self and custom build funding, funding applications and I will say again and loudly, by the 8th of November deadline. So, thank you very much everybody. And the workshop is now closed, thank you.

Application forms

One Public Estate

Self and Custom-Build


Application stage Date
Application window for OPE9 and Self and Custom-Build 2 opens 28 September 2021
Final deadline for OPE9 and Self and Custom-Build 2 applications 23:59 Monday 8 November 2021
Decision on final applications and announcement of funding awards Spring 2022


If successful, OPE partnerships will receive funding offers on behalf of project owners. Local Authority project owners will be provided with a Conditions of Funding letter. These documents will detail the funding award and delivery arrangements for funded projects.

Further guidance and support on applications is available from your OPE regional team.