CIAT: 0:03

Welcome to where it's at the Architectural Technology podcast from CIAT, that uses technology to talk Architectural Technology for technologists. The Principal Designer competency framework allows for Chartered Architectural Technologists to register as Principal Designers to explore what this means to the discipline. Professor Sam Allwinkle, Chair of the Principal Designer Competency Steering Group talks with Head of Membership, James Banks, about their work in developing the register. And its impact on members.

James Banks: 0:36

We're just having a bit of a catch up about the Principal Designer role that's been brought in post-Grenfell as part of the requirements under the Building Regulations. And we just want to try to give everyone a bit of an overview and a bit of insight about where we were, where we are and where we're moving towards. And I'd like to think most people in society have got a good overview of the issues in relation to Grenfell and the government have tried to make steps to ensure that never happens again. And you've been quite massively involved in the outcomes of that, haven't you, Sam, regarding the Hackitt Inquiry. So do you want to just give us a bit of a feel about that?

Professor Sam Allwinkle: 1:07

Yeah. Give some brief background and context James because I think it's important, never to forget the context as to why we have making the changes that we need to do. I was unfortunately in London of the evening in the morning of the Grenfell fire and overhead with helicopters. ambulances, fire tenders, I was only a couple of hours away from Grenfell, but I thought it was a terrorist attack until I turned on the television, and saw this basically towering inferno. And immediately I thought, how can a concrete frame building go on fire? Anyway very quickly I realized it wasn't just a concrete frame building, it was a concrete frame building that had been retrofitted by using an over-cladding system. It was designed to help the occupants in terms of provide a more kind of energy efficient occupancy. And that was a prime purpose. Unfortunately, the fire precautions were not up to standard. It was a perfect storm. There's so many things that went wrong that evening. And unfortunately, so many people lost their lives and so many people have been affected by that fire. And since that time there has been various inquiries. There has been a public inquiry regarding the occupants, that was important. And the second public inquiry finished in November 2022. And we're still waiting for the final report. And that was about the performance of the construction industry. Hopefully, that will be out this year and that will highlight many of the other issues that led to the Grenfell fire. Other things relating post-Grenfell was the Construction Industry Council really moved very quickly and set groups together. And CIAT, Chartered Institute of Architectural Technologists, was actively involved in that, and I was one of the people amongst many others from the institute who were involved. And Dame Judith Hackitt was appointed by the government to lead on reviewing the performance of the industry, and unfortunately, we didn't come out particularly well. And that's why there's a real focus now on building safety, and the resultant legislation and changes in legislation that have created this new role. Principal Designer for the Building Regulations.

James Banks: 3:32

So obviously, the legislation was published towards the end of 2023. So it is law now and obviously industries working on how they can comply with that. I think it's fair to say that Grenfell would be defined as what we call a higher risk building now under the legislation. Do you want to just give a brief summary of what would constitute a higher risk building?

Professor Sam Allwinkle: 3:51

It's really looking at the occupancy and the safety of the occupants in certain building typologies. And, and things like a height of a building is important, as in fact, its use. So things like high rise buildings that have people sleeping there 24/7 are a high risk. Other buildings, such as hotels, you might think, would be deemed as higher risk buildings, but they're not because hotels are managed and have have staff in place to manage the buildings, whereas the high rise residential buildings tend to not have people on site who manage the building. So that's the sort of difference, and then things like hospital buildings are also categorized as high risk buildings again, because of the nature of the occupation of parts of the hospital and that tends to link to height as well. So, these are the things I mean my view and opinion mean all buildings are high risk. So the main thing is we all have to make sure that we apply proportionately, you know the interventions that are required to make sure that buildings are safe for occupants and users.

James Banks: 4:59

Obviously within the regulations and legislation, there's two building typologies that have been defined for the role of Principal Designer. So you've got high risk buildings. And then all other buildings typologies are defined as non-high risk buildings. So there are slightly different requirements and obligations around competency and proficiency to act as the Principal Designer for those two buildings. And the Institute has a Register for Chartered Architectural Technologists to get registration, as a PD for either of those building typologies. So obviously, we've got the new legislation coming through to try and negate any issues around building failures and Grenfell's the primary driver for this. And that was one reason, or one type of unsafe building due to the cladding which is probably quite well known within society. Could you give us other examples of where there have been similar issues Sam and have also fed into and led to these amendments in the legislation.

Professor Sam Allwinkle: 5:48

Grenfell is the obvious one, certainly, that affects the legislation within England and Wales but there's fires happened throughout the UK, and another, such as The Cabin House Hotel in Loch Lomond, that was a result of management failure. And rather sadly, an individual who was a Night Porter, putting a bag of hot ashes in a cupboard in an entrance hall, where there was flammable materials, because he said, If the bed outside was too full, and in the morning, when the cleaning staff came on, opened the cupboard, there was an explosion, because air basically came in and ignited the hot ashes and caused the failure. Rather, sadly these things happened very suddenly. There was problems with Scottish schools and failure of the of the building. And in many areas it was, it was really a result of a collapsed wall that hadn't been constructed properly, that had been built. And the wall ties hadn't been tied back to anything to maintain that structural integrity. Fortunately, the children were inside because it was a very windy, stormy day, otherwise, many of the children would have been killed and seriously injured, because a wall collapsed on their playground. And that would have been catastrophic, too. So it's not just Grenfell alot of these things were happening. And and it's really informed, certainly the thinking primarily in England in terms of the Building Safety Act, and the secondary legislation and changes to the amendments, to the Building Regulations, but also in Scotland. I'm not necessarily putting my Scottish hat on but you know, we have different regulations and in Scotland we recognize there are things that are correct in the Scottish system, but there's also things that we need to improve on. So there's new things there in Scotland, about Compliance Plan Management, which is more about checking things on site that are built properly to the correct standards.

James Banks: 7:46

That's a good point, you raised Sam about the nuances and variations within the four Nations. So, you know, the legislation and the role of PD does differ in England to Wales. And obviously, then Scotland in something slightly different, I think Northern Ireland are yet to confirm their stance in regards to that. So it's prudent that people get an overview of which jurisdiction, this legislation applies, and what the necessary legal requirements would be. So obviously, we've got this PD role, which we think Chartered Architectural Technologists are ideally suited for, and we've launched this register for CIAT, for Members to get that opportunity for registration as a way of demonstrating their competence. But to sort of take a step back, you know, the bigger question is, why is one needed? You know, what's the envisaged role and functions of a PD, in relation to ensuring that buildings are safe, safe in use and safe for the end users of those buildings at all times? So obviously, Sam, you've been massively involved in, you know, working groups across industry, government representation, working with the departments, what would your summary be about, you know, what is a PD? In a very concise way

Professor Sam Allwinkle: 8:54

Have you got all day. It's really quite difficult to really kind of put into a few words, but again, just get a panning back a bit, the identified need was there, because within the industry, there are a lot of gaps in the process of designing and constructing buildings to just put it in simple terms. So this, this was a way of trying to create and it's not just Principal Designer, we also think about Principal Contractor. So legislation created really two roles to make sure that buildings were going to be delivered as safe buildings for safe use. So the Principal Designer role really is primarily there to make sure that everything is joined up. So it's very much about process. We're not sort of saying that Chartered Architectural Technologists, are not competent designers. But what this overlay is, is making sure that the processes are robust, and we follow the processes in terms of design management, the regulatory requirements, the technical requirements and the requirements. And it's all based upon competence. And, you know, behaviorial again, many people say look i'm qualified. Qualified means something but qualified, doesn't really imply that you're competent. Competence comes in the basis of where where one works over over a period of time to demonstrate that they are able to, to undertake certain roles and functions, and make sure that they're delivered within the context and the jurisdiction. So for example, I could be a Chartered Architectural Technologist in Scotland working to the Scottish system but that doesn't necessarily mean that I would be nececssarily competent within the English system, because the projects have maybe different regulatory requirements, different procedure requirements. So therefore, if I want to be competent in England, I would have to learn about the procedures and regulations in England. Now there may not be too much of a difference but it's important that that we can demonstrate that Members, wherever they operate, are competent within that jurisdiction. And that's really important.

James Banks: 11:04

I'm an employee of CIAT, so I'm not an Architectural Technology Professional but I'm a professional administrator that will oversee the registration and qualification process for CIAT team members wishing to get that competency validation from the institute. But if you look at the legislation, actually, the requirement at a Principal Designer is that they need to demonstrate competence, but it hasn't quite been defined on exactly how one would do that. So therefore, CIAT decided for the benefit of their Members, they would develop a Competency Framework, a Competency Assessment Scheme, so that Chartered Architectural Technologists are in a position should they be required to demonstrate competency that they can reference back to their accreditation through CIAT and having attained that qualification. But who's responsible for appointing the PD and a PC so the Principal Designer, the Principal Contractor?

Professor Sam Allwinkle: 11:55

Within the legislation, the Regulators have made the client or basically, those that commission buildings the people who are accountable, and their accountability is that they must, appoint competent people. Therefore, they have to provide, they have to appoint a competent Principal Designer in the case of see our Members who wish to pursue the route of being a Principal Designer and what we have in terms of being able to legitimize the competency framework that we have, is that we have used the document created by the British Standards Institute. Again, I've been involved in the expert panel in the creation of that which is PAS 8671, which is a competency requirements for Principal Designers. But that's, that's then based upon some primary document, now BS 8670, which is the overall competency framework for the Built Environment. So it's all there, it's all in place and therefore, if our Members qualify through our framework as competent, then they know they can refer to both BS 8670 and BS 8671 as basically the kind of authenticity of our framework and the legitimacy of our framework between requirements and therefore to clients, then they can demonstrate that they are Principal Designers in particular typologies.

James Banks: 13:21

A point that gets raised with me anyway is you know, why should I be one? Do I have to be registered with CIAT, as a competent Principal Designer on a Register, and the regulations don't actually stipulate how you would demonstrate competence it's just CIAT have tried to facilitate that option for registration for Members. But legally, as far as I understand, every project in England and Wales will have someone who would, in essence be termed the Principal Designer. Would you say that's a fair summary Sam?

Professor Sam Allwinkle: 13:53

Yes, that's correct James. You know, the it's not, it's not written in legislation that, that someone has to be registered as a Principal Designer and competent Principal Designer. But it again, is back to the clients. They're the ones who are appointing competent people and if I was a client, I'd want to know that someone had been been assessed by someone, to determine that they are competent. There are only, I mean, I'm aware that the RIBA have a competency framework and again, that's based on 8671 there's The Association of Project Safety they've created a framework again based on 8671 for Principal Designers. The thing with with our framework, which is similar to RIBA we've maintained that as basically an exclusive framework only open to our Chartered Members and similarly with the RIBA is only eligible for for architects. So, the APS one is more open for everyone who maybe are not aligned to other any association But that's people's choice they can decide not to join the Register. But certainly if I was in practice, I would, I would join the Register, because it would give me some comfort that the services I was offering clients were basically endorsed by another party. And I think that's really important. And that's the way the world is going. I mean it's not just - I mean I can assure everyone who's going to listen to this there's other stuff coming down the track. There's stuff on organizational capability, that people are in practice are going to have to demonstrate that their organizations have the correct capability or capacity and competence to operate in whatever sphere that they operate in within the industry. So the world is changing within the construction industry after primarily Dame Judith Hackitt who I think made us out to be a bunch of bandits, actually. And I think we're having to get our house in order. So rather than being legislated we do it ourselves.

James Banks: 15:54

Now, on that point of organizational capability, our Register is registration of individuals around their proficiency within the role. So it wouldn't be for every Chartered Architectural Technologist, it would only be for those individuals that have the knowledge, skills and experience to meet the competencies and should show the behavioral capacity as required through our competency framework. But the phrase Principal Designer has actually been out in industry for quite a while now. Because there's Principal Designer CDM, and you've got Principal Designer Building Regulations for want of a better phrase, so that has led to some confusion within the industry and I know Sam, having had a few conversations with you before, you've got a very concise way of actually summarizing the differentials between PD CDM and PD Building Regulation. So it might be a good time for you to let everybody know how you can summarize that in a very succinct manner and understand the nuances and variations in between the two.

Professor Sam Allwinkle: 16:48

Just to say I understand the difficulty people have and clients have as well, because the CDM - The Construction Design and Management Regulations 2015 - you know, the CDM has been around before then this, that was the most recent legislation, but it is very much focused on the process of building. So I'll refer to building as a verb, which is really the CDM. And building as a noun a product is about what this PD is for the Building Regulations. So, it's a product in use by the occupants. Whereas the CDM is about building as a process and making sure that we protect the operatives, on-site and around the sites during operations. So two different things. And to give an example of a recent case of unfortunate failure was a roof slate, fell off a roof, at a hotel that was being basically refurbished, and was having, was being re-roofed. And the hotel kept the hotel operating, they had a kind of a fitness center and swimming pool. And unfortunately, the roof tile fell off the roof and hit a child in a pram and thankfully, the child wasn't killed but was seriously injured. And one might think, well what's that got to do with Principal Designers. Well, the Judge Ruled that the Principal Designer was guilty of basically being liable for not undertaking a proper risk assessment for that process. Principal Contractor was also fined and found guilty for not building and making the building safe during the construction phase, and the client was fined under the Health and Safety at Work Act for not appointing, the people who would undertake the safety of those operations. So, you know, it's really quite complex the whole area. So that that was really a very different, a different thing, which was really about the process of building and construction. Not necessarily just about the operatives but also the people around that building during the operations of construction. Whereas the new Regulations Principal Designer is primarily focused about occupancy and use once that building is finished.

James Banks: 19:03

So Sam, just a very quick question on this point. If a Member is the original designer, and aren't officially appointed the Principal Designer would they still potentially default to becoming a Principal Designer, and do Members need to be a bit wary of that?

Professor Sam Allwinkle: 19:17

I think Members have to be wary of that because if someone's a CDM you can end up being, I a suppose titled PD, if you have not been necessarily recognized by the client. I mean sometimes they'll just maybe go for the client but they could go for you too as you have undertaken that particular function. All be it not in name. Similarly what again, we we've all not addressed within the industry there's other things about competencies for designers. So all designers need to be competent and that's that's the next layer down that we need to think about as the Institute about members who are practising in design, how do we, how do they demonstrate their competence as designers. Even the smallest thing you know, even a simple specification is design. So that it's it's really, you know, going to expand and expand and expand and, you know, just to refer to to those that enforce the Regulations, the Building Standard Surveyors, they're all going through a process of of demonstrating their competency. Throughout, certainly throughout England. And I've recently been appointed in Scotland to Chair a panel on behalf of the Scottish Government and the Building Standards Division to review the Competency Standards for Building Standards Professionals in Scotland. So, if those are actually making sure that people are complying and enforce those standards are working to competencies by we can be sure this is going to percolate and hit everyone.

James Banks: 20:44

I'm aware of many Building Control Officers having to re-qualify and demonstrate competence to continue to fulfil that role. So my understanding is non-HRBs will still be under the guise of Buiilding Control but HRBs would fall under the guise of Building Safety Regulator. So there's some variations, there's some changes that you might need to be aware of. Another thing I've also heard is, if you are fulfilling the role of a PD, and you haven't spoke to your insurers, you really should be bringing them up to speed as to what you're delivering service wise to ensure that you're fully covered because professional indemnity insurance is there to protect you, as a professional at the end of the day. And I know CIAT Insurance Services are working with the Members to ensure that they've got the most inclusive and appropriate suitable cover for those Members but alot of our Members aren't on the CIAT Insurance Scheme either. So we would highly advise that you speak to your insurers to make sure that you've got sufficient cover if you're going to be fulfilling the role of a Principal Designer in regards to Building Regulations.

Professor Sam Allwinkle: 21:45

We've got a good good idea about the background about the why and the how, and what our framework is about but can you maybe explain the process that a Member would go through to become a Principal Designer and to be registered by CIAT.

James Banks: 22:02

Yes, first and foremost, you will need to be a registered active Chartered Architectural Technologist to be eligible to apply for registration. So, if you haven't got that qualification to date, you will need to work through the Professional Assessment Process to get your Chartership before you can consider applying. If you are a Chartered Architectural Technologist, then there's 3 applications you could potentially undertake. So, it's registration for a PD on non-HRBs. There's a process to move from a non-HRB PD to a HRB PD. And then there's also the registration as a HRB PD. So, there's 3 applications on the form. And within that there'll be a certain word limits and all the bullet point competencies that you need to address from within the competency framework are embedded in the application form. So you will need to write a written narrative, addressing each of the specific competencies within the framework. Contextualize your experience. And then you will need to provide supporting documentary evidence from practice to show your outputs and experiences in industry to backup those relevant statements against the respective bullet points within the four areas defined within the competency framework. Moreover, within the framework, there's a list of performance requirements. So those performance requirements in a very concise and understandable manner around, types of evidence or documents, we would expect you to consider providing to meet the respective bullet points to support your narrative. We've worked with the Principal Designer Competency Steering Group made up a Chartered Architectural Technologists to get those performance requirements lists of evidence for registration of non-HRBs and/or HRBs, in an easy, succinct list, so that you can cherry pick the experiences and the evidence you've got and contextualize that within the application. Once you're happy that you've addressed each of the competencies, you've provided evidence to back up your narrative, and you've signed the Declaration, you will then be able to submit your application for assessment to CIAT. So you'd need to email that to PD register at CIAT dot global, and you'll have to pay the applicable fees. So non-HRB registration is £200; HRB registration is £350. And if you want to move from the non-HRB registration to HRB registration, you'd have to pay£150 difference and complete the specific application form. If you happen to go for HRB registration as a PD, that will also mean that you've automatically met the criteria for registration as a PD for non-HRBs. So you'll get that dual registration and that dual accreditation. We're aiming to turn around the decision on your application within 28 working days, but we just need to be mindful that the scheme is just launched. And it just depends on the sheer volume of applications that come in. But throughout this whole process, we'll keep you advised and updated. If we need a bit a little bit longer to make that appropriate decision The only other difference between HRB and non-HRB registration other than the additional competencies in red compared to those in black, is that you will need to sit a professional interview with your peers. So these will be held remotely over Zoom, it probably lasts about 30 to 45 minutes. But we also hold the right to invite any non-HRB Registrant to a professional interview to ensure that we're confident in your competence for registration. But for most people, if you're registering as a PD for non-HRBs it will be your written application, your portfolio of evidence that will lead to registration. And in the period from the 1st May 2024 to the 31st April 2025, no subscription will be charged for your registration to Chartered Architectural Technologist, until we understand the actual cost to administer to register to the institute. But be mindful that from the 1st May 2025, there will be a subscription to cover our associated costs, to enable us to continue offering this service for the benefit of Members. And upon successful attainment of either registration that would enable you to be on CIAT's publicly available Register. So that, should a client look to find a competent PD, there's that facility through the CIAT Directory online.

Professor Sam Allwinkle: 26:20

James that was a very useful summary that I think would be helpful for Members. But James is saying this is all evidence based. So it's not about, some theoretical exercise, it's really about you must be able to demonstrate the competence. So you must be able you must be practising, you must be doing this type of work. So it's very much different from I suppose maybe traditional approach to qualifying this is this is reverse engineered. So it's about an output driven process rather than input driven process. And it's judged by peers. So people who are undertaking the role of Principal Designer, but judging other others who are undertaking that role. So it's not about myself or James making those judgments, we we've helped use our experience and knowledge to set up the framework. But in reality it's those that are practising in that field. So they're managing it, they're assessing, we have a role in terms of that verification and auditing to make sure they're following procedures and processes, but it's really about Members judging Members.

James Banks: 27:30

Coming back to that point about what's further down the track, it's quite clear to me that the HSE are quite keen to see industry take on the mantle and implement the relevant changes that are expected. Moreover, the insurance market is keeping quite a close eye on the ramifications and obligations and the changes in the Regulations and how that might affect Members and practitioners within the industry. So for CIAT, we just want to try and ensure that we can raise the bar regarding the proficiency within the realm of being a Principal Designer in relation to the Building Regulations. Hence we have our Register and if you need that accreditation, or you want that registration, and you're not a Chartered Architectural Technologist, then you will need to go through the CIAT qualifying process to make yourself eligible for registration. But all members that are fulfiling that Role, feel they need that accreditation and recognition are encouraged to go through our process and get registration as a PD, whether it be for non-HRB, or for HRB.

Professor Sam Allwinkle: 28:29

So, who would they get in touch with, say if I was a Member coming to the Institute who should they contact?

James Banks: 28:35

So, if you want to find out more about the competency requirements, the application forms, the registration options, the fees for qualification, as well as watch a webinar that Sam and I have hosted around registration with a PD with CIAT, check out the links in the podcast chat. And that will stream you through to where you need to go. The idea within CIAT is that you've got a community of fellow Architectural Technology Professionals who may well have similar experiences or additional experiences to you, who may well be able to give you a steer and an opportunity to get a better understanding of the obligations and the ramifications of what the legislation stipulates and how that could drip feed into your professional scope of Architectural Technology. So I would strongly recommend you try and use the CIAT community, whether it be in your Region, whether it be through the aspirATion group, whether it be through Technology Network on the website, whether it be through the Register of Principal Designers that is on the CIAT website now. There's communities and most Members from my experience are very approachable, they want to help others. You know, we're all in it together. We're all one family we're all the profession and discipline of Architectural Technology and Chartered Architectural Technologists so sometimes you just need to ask that question, and you need to reach out for that support, and CIAT will try and provide that to you. If you've got specific individual questions or queries, by all means, please email pdregister@ciat.global so that, we can look to respond accordingly and give you a bit of a steer. If you want to find out a bit more about who can help you or where to turn, if you're not quite sure, on your options, or whether it's something suitable for you, then CIAT is your touch point. There's the Technology Network that you can access through my CIAT, or you can contact us through various socials. So whether it be LinkedIn, Instagram, or X. So we've got our scheme, we'd encourage you to apply. It's not mandatory, it's just there as one way for an Architectural Technology Professional to demonstrate competence to external third parties and clients. And, you know, thinking it from my perspective, if I was a client, and I knew that ultimately all of it came back to me, I would be ensuring with my due diligence checks are done. And I would be looking for Registers or ways of external bodies, such as CIAT, providing verification of competence of individuals to provide that service because it all leads back to the client at the end of the day. And one would envisage that clients would like to ensure that they've done the best they can, should anything go awry further down the line, because, as Sam alluded to, ultimately, and unfortunately, accidents do happen, injuries occur, and litigation and attendance to court is the worst case scenario. And if you can try and negate mechanisms for that to happen in reality, then I think you should try and take those preventative steps in the first instance.

Professor Sam Allwinkle: 31:32

No, well, put James so basically, we're all about raising standards, we're all about making sure that the public are safe. And you know, we are we have a Royal Charter as well that we comply with and that's what we must ensure that we're there for the greater good of people in places, to make sure that everyone is safe, and will not be affected and particularly in things like Grenfell from fire and smoke.

CIAT: 32:00

Thank you to Sam and James for their time to discuss this important change in Regulations. For those involved in both high risk and non-high risk buildings. Don't forget to subscribe and share, until the next time! The contents and views expressed by individuals in the where it's at podcasts are their own, and do not necessarily represent the views of the companies they work for or the host. This podcast is for informational purposes only and should not be considered as advice