EVALUATION

Recommendations

Info

AN INDEPENDENT <strong>EVALUATION</strong> OF THE LCNF Success of the Low Carbon Network Fund 1 Objectives of the LCNF can be summarised as: • Incentivising the DNOs to include innovation as part of their core business. • Helping the DNOs to move towards a low carbon business whilst maintaining security of supply and delivering value for money to customers. • Helping the DNOs facilitate low carbon and energy saving initiatives. • Dissemination of learning to facilitate roll out of successful trials and subsequent network savings and or carbon benefits. • Collaboration between the DNOs, and with third party project partners. 1.1 Do you believe that the LCNF has met its objective in incentivising the DNOs to include innovation as part of their core business? What justification do you have for your response? 1.2 Do you believe that the LCNF has met its objective of helping the DNOs move towards a low carbon business whilst maintaining security of supply and delivering value for money to customers? What justification do you have for your response? 1.3 Do you believe that the LCNF has met its objective of helping the DNOs facilitate low carbon and energy saving initiatives? What justification do you have for your response? 1.4 Do you believe that the LCNF has met its objective of the dissemination of learning to facilitate roll-out of successful trials? Are you able to provide examples to support your view? Are you aware of learning being implemented from trials by other DNOs as well as their own? Are you able to provide examples to support your views? 1.5 Do you believe that the LCNF has met its objective of effective collaboration between the DNOs and project partners? Where appropriate please provide evidence of the success, or otherwise, of collaboration. 1.6 Are you aware of any barriers that may have affected the outcome of the projects? 1.7 Are you aware of any barriers that may have discouraged project partner involvement? 1.8 In your view, which parts of the LCNF have worked well and which haven’t? What would you change in retrospect and why? Innovation in GB 2.1 To what extent do you believe that these innovation projects would have occurred without the LCNF? Are you able to provide examples to support your views? 2.2 Do you believe the LCNF has prevented, or otherwise discouraged, private sector innovation? Are you able to provide examples to support your view? 2.3 Do you think third party access to LCNF funding would improve the quality of innovation projects and if so why? PÖYRY MANAGEMENT CONSULTING October 2016 713_Poyry_Report_Evaluation_of_the_LCNF_FINAL_Oct_2016_v700.docx 364
AN INDEPENDENT <strong>EVALUATION</strong> OF THE LCNF LCNF Scheme Overview 3.1 How well did Ofgem communicate information regarding the introduction of the LCNF effectively? Were you aware of the LCNF from the outset? Was there sufficient information to enable you to understand how you could get involved with the scheme? 3.2 Do you believe the initial LCNF criteria set out by Ofgem was appropriate? Did the criteria give you a clear understanding of the types of projects Ofgem was expecting? 3.3 Did Ofgem communicate information regarding the LCNF effectively? (e.g. changes to the scheme etc.) 3.4 Was the application process straightforward to understand and follow? Was it made clear to you what should be included within your application? 3.5 Was the process for ‘project selection’ clear? Was this clearly communicated? 3.6 Did Ofgem follow the ‘project selection’ criteria as has been outlined? Was there sufficient communication between Ofgem and yourself during the selection process (e.g. did Ofgem ask any clarification questions)? 3.7 In cases where a project was rejected, how would you rate the quality of the feedback provided by Ofgem on the reason for its decision? 3.8 How has the LCNF altered your perception of how innovation is viewed by Ofgem? Specific Project Partner Questions 4.1 How did you become involved in an LCNF project? Were the DNOs proactive or reactive in their engagement with you? 4.2 How did you contribute to the initial project innovation ideas and scoping? 4.3 How did you contribute to the success of the project, how were ideas developed and incorporated during the project? 4.4 How did you contribute to the project roll out? 4.5 What general comments do you have about the engagement mechanisms used by the DNOs in respect of initiation, your inclusion and involvement and development of ideas throughout the project lifespan? 4.6 How well did the LCNF allow satisfactory commercial arrangements? 4.7 To what extent are Intellectual Property (IP) rights treated appropriately within the LCNF and have any concerns been addressed in the latest NIC IP arrangements? PÖYRY MANAGEMENT CONSULTING October 2016 713_Poyry_Report_Evaluation_of_the_LCNF_FINAL_Oct_2016_v700.docx 365
Page 1 and 2:
AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION OF THE LC
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318: AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION OF THE LC
Page 367: AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION OF THE LC
show all

EVALUATION

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?