Methodology
The basis on which the fee envelopes, RIBA-stage mapping, deliverables checklist and grant-eligibility verdicts published on this site have been derived. Issued in the form a chartered quantity surveyor or procurement officer would expect to receive under a RICS or RIBA report and audit a figure against.
1. Fee derivation
1.1 Day-rate derivation
Day rates are stated as net professional fee, exclusive of VAT, expenses and disbursements, in line with the RICS New Rules of Measurement (NRM1) treatment of professional fees. The rate ladder for each discipline has been calibrated against (a) the two published rate cards available in the open market, (b) the DfE Technical Advisor Services 2025 framework rate card, and (c) a sample of twelve recent academy-sector engagements benchmarked between Q3 2025 and Q2 2026. BCIS
Architect: £650-£1,100 per day, ranging from junior team member to chartered project director. Quantity surveyor: £700-£1,150. Mechanical and electrical engineer: £750-£1,200. Structural engineer: £700-£1,150. Planning consultant: £800-£1,300. Sustainability consultant: £750-£1,250, with the upper bound reserved for Gen Zero specialism. Building surveyor: £600-£950. Acoustics consultant: £700-£1,100. Rates are reviewed at twelve-monthly intervals and on any material change to the DfE Technical Advisor Services framework.
1.2 Scope-day derivation
Scope-days per discipline have been derived from RIBA Plan of Work 2020 fee-curve guidance for Stages 0 to 2, normalised to the school-sector deliverable set described at clause 3 of this Methodology. Where the published fee curve and the benchmarked sample diverge, the benchmarked figure is adopted and the divergence noted in the fee-builder workings. RIBA POW 2020
1.3 Regional factor application
A BCIS Tender Price Index regional factor is applied to the assembled day-rate × scope-day total as a single multiplier on net fee, in line with the RICS NRM1 commentary on regional cost variation. No regional factor is applied separately to disbursements or to the planning consultant element, which is taken at LPA-specific listed fees.
1.4 Project-type and phase uplifts
A flat uplift of up to 12% is applied to the assembled net fee to reflect specialist scope (SEN under BB104, listed-building or conservation-area sites, decant-driven phasing). The uplift is itemised in the fee-builder and is not compounded across categories.
2. RIBA-stage reconciliation
2.1 Stage envelope
A school feasibility study is treated, on the canonical reading of the RIBA Plan of Work 2020, as spanning Stage 0 (Strategic Definition), Stage 1 (Preparation and Briefing) and Stage 2 (Concept Design). Stage 2 is taken to close on issue of Cost Plan A under NRM1 and receipt of a planning pre-application response letter.
2.2 Reconciliation between consultants
Where individual consultants describe scope using alternative stage labels (for example pre-Stage 0 strategic review or Stage 2+ outline business case), the scope is mapped back to the canonical RIBA Plan of Work 2020 stage definitions before any fee or deliverable is published. The mapping crosswalk is held in the fee-builder source for audit on request.
3. Deliverables register
Each deliverable in the published checklist is referenced to its underlying standard: BB103 and BB104 for area schedules, NRM1 for Cost Plan A, RICS Measured Surveys of Land, Buildings and Utilities for the topographical and measured-building survey, HSG264 for the asbestos refurbishment and demolition survey, and Gen Zero for the net-zero specification where in scope. Deliverables not referenced to a public standard have been excluded.
4. Grant-eligibility verdicts
4.1 Verdict scoring
A green verdict denotes a funding route that pays the feasibility fee upfront or procures the work directly (SRP, R&R, SCA at body discretion, self-funded). An amber verdict denotes a route that recovers the fee post-award from the project allocation, requiring the trust to carry the fee in the interim (CIF, VAP). A red verdict is reserved for routes that exclude feasibility entirely; on the current English route set, none of the five major routes does and therefore no current verdict is red. CIF 2025-26 guide
4.2 Rule attribution
Each verdict is anchored to a specific scheme rule and the rule reference is rendered inline on every FundingChip and on the corresponding funding-route page. Verdicts derived from oral confirmation (for example DfE delivery-team correspondence) are not published; only verdicts derived from a published rule appear on this site.
5. Refresh and version control
Each source carries a verified date held in the source register. The CIF, SCA and VAP applicants' guides are re-verified at every round opening; the £710m Renewal & Retrofit Programme allocations are re-verified as cohorts are announced; day rates are re-benchmarked annually against the DfE Technical Advisor Services framework and a refreshed academy-sector sample. The site-level Last Reviewed date in the page footer reflects the most recent verification pass. R&R announcement
6. Limitations
This Methodology covers the derivation of published fee envelopes, deliverables and grant-eligibility verdicts only. It does not constitute a specific recommendation or formal cost advice for any particular project, scheme or trust. Fee envelopes are stated as ranges and should not be substituted for a tendered fee; nineteen of the twenty-one consultants surveyed do not publish a rate, and the indicative ranges shown here are reconciled against framework and benchmark data rather than a competitive tender. Verdicts are stated on the published rules in force at the date of last review and may not reflect in-round delivery-team practice or unpublished concessions. The fee envelope excludes local-authority planning pre-application fees (£500 to £8,000, LPA-dependent), specialist intrusive surveys, independent peer review, VAT, contingency and expenses; each is itemised on the relevant brief-template page. Cost Plan A figures are not amalgamated across schemes of differing scope.