Notice
Warm Homes: Social Housing Fund: Wave 3 - application forms clarifications (updated 21 November 2024)
Updated 12 May 2025
Applies to England
For any queries related to the WH:SHF Wave 3 application process and forms, including the issues listed here, please contact rise@turntown.co.uk.
Application forms clarifications
Question number(s) | Application Form(s) | Details | Solution for applicants |
---|---|---|---|
Declaration (procurement act) | All | Implementation of the Procurement Act 2023 has been delayed until 24 February 2025. | Responses to this declaration question (whether a 바카라 사이트˜Yes바카라 사이트™, 바카라 사이트˜No바카라 사이트™ or simply left blank) will not be taken into account when assessing applications. An amended superseding declaration will be shared with applicants at grant funding agreement stage. |
Declaration (safety standards) | All | Typo: 바카라 사이트˜바카라 사이트¦and any statutory requirements for Principal Designs to be appointed.바카라 사이트™ The text should instead refer to 바카라 사이트˜Principal Designers바카라 사이트™. | Responses to this declaration question (whether a 바카라 사이트˜Yes바카라 사이트™, 바카라 사이트˜No바카라 사이트™ or simply left blank) will not be taken into account when assessing applications. An amended superseding declaration will be shared with applicants at grant funding agreement stage. |
1.2 | All | Clarification: Name of the lead applicant should be the name of the organisation, not an individual. | N/A |
1.9 | Challenge Fund (CF) consortium applicant, Strategic Partnership (SP) consortium applicant | Omission: List of consortium members doesn바카라 사이트™t explicitly ask for consortium lead to be included, nor does it automatically pull this information from the earlier consortium lead question. Yet this table then pulls into subsequent Section 2 questions, risking the consortium lead being missed out. | The list of consortium members in 1.9 must include the consortium lead. |
1.29 (CF) / 1.27 (SP) | All | Clarification: Signature question does not require an actual signature, only the indicated fields need to be completed. | N/A |
2.4/2.5 | All | Omission: The question guidance does not specify whether the figure should include homes which are already at EPC C+ and are included in the project for infill purposes; or for the installation of LCH. | The figure listed for this question should not include homes which are already at EPC C+. |
2.6/2.7a) (CF) / 2.9a)/2.10a) (SP) | All | Error: 바카라 사이트˜Issue Identified바카라 사이트™ box incorrectly indicating that 바카라 사이트˜total number of homes does not match바카라 사이트™. | If applicants have entered the same number of homes in each part of this question, they should ignore the 바카라 사이트˜Issue Identified바카라 사이트™ message. It will not impact their application. |
3.2 | Strategic Partnership (SP) individual, SP consortium | Error: 바카라 사이트˜Issue Identified바카라 사이트™ box incorrectly indicating that 바카라 사이트˜The homes treated, to EPC C, or energy savings do not match Strategic Fit questions 2.3, 2.5 or 2.7바카라 사이트™. | If applicants have entered the same number of homes for this question as they have for the corresponding questions in Section 2, they should ignore the 바카라 사이트˜Issue Identified바카라 사이트™ message. It will not impact their application. |
3.4/3.5 (CF) / 3.3/3.4 (SP) | All | Error: There are two scenarios in which the 바카라 사이트˜Issue Identified바카라 사이트™ box incorrectly indicates that 바카라 사이트˜Co-funding contribution is less than 50%바카라 사이트™. a) When applicants indicate homes will access the on gas grid low carbon heating incentive offer. Grant funding for these homes does not need to be matched with co-funding. b) When applicants want to request a grant funding amount that is less than the maximum available grant funding. | Both: In either of these scenarios, applicants should ignore this 바카라 사이트˜Issue Identified바카라 사이트™ message. It will not impact their application. But a short explanation for the level of co-funding stated in this question must then be provided in the subsequent 바카라 사이트˜sources of proposed co-funding contribution바카라 사이트™ question. b) only: The actual requested grant funding amount will need to be formally communicated to DESNZ at a later date, so it can be correctly listed in the GFA. DESNZ will provide more information on this process to relevant applicants at a later date. |
3.8 (CF) / 3.7 (SP) | All | Omission: Lack of clarity as to whether the examples listed in the question guidance must be addressed. | Applicants are expected to reference at least two approaches from the list provided in the question guidance. |
5.2 | All | Omission: There is no direct reference to 바카라 사이트˜quality바카라 사이트™ in the question guidance. | Applicants are expected to include their plans for quality assurance in their answers. |
5.4 (CF) | CF consortium applicant | Typo: 5.4 is incorrectly placed where it asks applicants to confirm Annex D has been uploaded. In should instead be listed for the question below (managing the delivery of the consortium), which currently has no question number. | N/A |