EVALUATION

AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION OF THE LCNF
Another respondent stated that for a small company like themselves the LCNF has
provided great opportunities, and allowed them to build in confidence. But they also hear
of DNOs (or PMs) being less open to involving SMEs, which they feel is short-sighted as
SMEs with unique and smart ideas are exactly those who would benefit from the support.
Finally, one respondent believes the LCNF has definitely been positive from a culture
change and technical point of view, but it is harder to judge if it has been so positive in a
value for money sense. They continued on to say that as projects move down the TRL it
will become more risky – and they query if there will be a point where it no longer makes
sense that Ofgem has control of the scheme.
B.6 Research Establishment Questions
B.6.1
Increased Engagement with DNOs (Q6.1)
Questions:
Has the LCNF increased your engagement with DNOs? Please provide examples
where you can
B.6.1.1 Summary of Responses
All bar one of the respondents that answered the question (six of seven) stated that the
fund did increase their engagement with DNOs – with the one negative response down to
them already having a reasonably established relationship with nearly all the DNOs
through previous work.
One respondent now has a supportive DNO aiding them with an ESPCR research project
and involvement with one DNO led to further work with another DNO in a similar area.
Another respondent now has more awareness of the activities and concerns of DNOs and
thus more awareness of the opportunities for universities to engage with DNOs. Another
respondent agreed with this point.
Finally, one respondent remarked that although they had a lot of interaction with the DNO
during the project unfortunately many of that team have been promoted out of the future
networks sector so the long term relationship may not be as good it could have been.
B.6.2
Fitting Into Existing GB Framework (Q6.2)
Questions:
Do you think the LCNF fits appropriately into the existing GB research framework?
B.6.2.1 Summary of Responses
Half of the respondents (four) felt the LCNF does fit into the existing GB research
framework.
B.6.2.2 Technology Readiness Level
One respondent suggested the LCNF/NIC could adopt various levels (early/mid/late) for
funding requests – allowing funding for early stage ideas i.e. lower TRL, and bigger
funding percentages for ideas at a higher TRL.
PÖYRY MANAGEMENT CONSULTING
October 2016
713_Poyry_Report_Evaluation_of_the_LCNF_FINAL_Oct_2016_v700.docx
160