Full Business Case · Full Business Case INFRASTRUCTURE (NON-TRANSPORT) Date of Issue - May 2018 2 1.3 - Please provide an update on any key changes and developments since the submission

Full Business Case INFRASTRUCTURE (NON-TRANSPORT)

Date of Issue - May 2018 1

1 - SCHEME DETAILS

1.1 - SCHEME & APPLICANT’S INFORMATION

Scheme Name: National Centre of Excellence for Food Engineering

Scheme Location/ Address, including Post Code and Local Authority Area:

Junction Attercliffe Common / Newhall Road S9 3TY Sheffield City Council

Applicant Organisation, Size & Company Registration Number (if applicable):

Sheffield Hallam University

Contact Name and Role: Tim Strickland

Address: The Research and Innovation Office, Sheffield Hallam University, City Campus S1 1WB

Email:

Telephone:

Other Delivery Partners and Roles: N/A

1.2 - FINANCIAL SUMMARY

A - Total Scheme Cost (£) 10,486,599

B - Total Private Investment (£): [Provide details of total private investment secured or anticipated]

C - Total Other Public Sector Investment (Non-SCR Funding) (£):

£6,920,000 Office for Students £2,781,488 ERDF £9,701,488 Total

D - SCR Grant Funding Sought (£): £618,704

E - SCR Loan Funding Sought (£): [Provide details of the total SCR grant funding sought – i.e. recoverable]

F - Total SCR Funding Sought (£): £618,704

G - SCR as % of Total Scheme Investment (G=F/A):

5.8%



1.3 - Please provide an update on any key changes and developments since the submission of the Strategic / Outline Business Case

[This includes total project cost, SCR funding request e.g. loan or grant, key dates and milestones, spend profiles, progress with other funding applications and any other material changes relevant to this scheme – maximum 200 words]

The site was purchased in January 2018 Planning Permission was granted on 8 June 2018. All planning conditions will be discharged within 6 - 8 weeks of approval, which will before Stage 2, contracting with BAM on 20th August 2018 SHU entered into a Pre-Contract Services Agreement (PCSA) dated 19 January 2018 with BAM Construction Services Ltd. The order for stage 2 is programmed to be placed on 20 August 2018. The overall forecast cost of the project construction and related works has however increased from £5,85m to £6,49m. The costs are being Value Engineered throughout the design process with a review to bringing the project nearer the original budget, but we expect overall to meet the forecast spend profile. Project design and delivery timetable is progressing after some minor delays in Planning approval.

2 - SCHEME SUMMARY

2.1 - Scheme Timescales [Include comments to explain significant changes in planned dates]

Gateway / Stage Date Planned at

S/OBC Date Achieved /

Planned Reasons for

Variance

Strategic Business Case

Outline Business Case 08/12/17

Full Business Case 14/07/18

Full Approval and Contract Award 01/07/18 17/08/18 Delay in planning approval

Start on Site / Begin Delivery Construction Begins 10/09/18

Completion of Delivery/Outputs 14/06/19

Completion of Outcomes 14/06/22

Project Evaluation 31/07/18

2.2 - Please provide a summary description of your scheme, appending any supporting graphics where relevant. This section should be suitable for publishing on your own and the SCR website.

[A summary of the scheme – maximum 300 words] The National Centre of Excellence for Food Engineering NCEFE will be a £10.6m new build Research & Development Facility that will integrate innovation in food processing, packaging, handling, storage and distribution equipment with techniques in food engineering and automation, ensuring the UK's Food manufacturing sector continues to be globally competitive and the largest manufacturing employer in the UK. The Food and Drink Manufacturing and Processing Industry in England is critically important to the UK economy employing 400,000 people. The sector has a value to the UK economy in turnover terms of £76 billion. The project will deliver unique engineering solutions and skills to a rapidly evolving sector



which is dependent on innovation, automation and new technologies. NCEFE has been developed in partnership with the Food and Drink Federation (FDF) and Skills Academy Food and Drink. FDF and Government have also launched a shared vision to grow food and drink manufacturing by 20% by 2020, this sets an agreed target of a £4bn increase in GVA in the sector by 2020. The Centre of Excellence is expected to contribute to the achievement of this target. The increased use of engineering, advanced manufacturing and innovative technologies in the Food and drink sector creates significant new opportunities for food companies in the city region and those companies seeking new markets for example those with automation and control technologies, computer control, sensors, product handling, refrigeration and heat exchange products and other transferable technologies.

2.3 - Please provide details of what activities SCR funds will be specifically used to pay for.

[Set out exactly what SCR funds will be used for (e.g. site remediation). Bullet point will suffice – maximum 200 words] The SCRIF fund will be used to fill a funding gap in the construction of the new building over the period to 31srt March 2019, thereby freeing up additional funds in for the fit out and equipment of the R&D facility, which is integral to the delivery of the project objectives of stimulating industry collaboration, investment in Research and Development (R&D) in order to promote industry competiveness and address sector challenges for example in food quality, energy use in production, waste reduction and increased efficiencies in storage product handling, production, packaging and distribution and the acute shortage of Engineering skills supporting the food sector. The nationally important R&D facility will create opportunities for SCR based companies in the food, manufacturing and related sectors. .



3 - STRATEGIC DIMENSION

SHEFFIELD CITY REGION STRATEGIC VISION Our vision is to create: A City Region with a stronger and bigger private sector that can compete in national and global markets. To achieve this, we are acting in six areas: 1. Ensuring new businesses receive the support they need to flourish 2. Facilitating and proactively supporting growth amongst existing firms 3. Attracting investment from other parts of the UK and overseas, and improving our brand 4. Increasing sales of SCR’s goods and services to other parts of the UK and abroad 5. Developing the SCR skills base, labour mobility and education performance 6. Securing investment in infrastructure where it will do most to support growth

PART 1 - SCHEME RATIONALE

3.1 - What opportunities or barriers will this scheme unlock? Please make specific reference to barriers to economic growth.

What is the rationale for public sector investment in this project. Please specify the market failure or equity objective. Detail the opportunities/barriers to economic growth that have been identified, supported by sufficient evidence. Please note that the primary objective of LGF is to create jobs and grow the SCR economy. – maximum 500 words] Rationale for intervention ''There is currently no food sector standard engineering provision in the UK and no specialist centres of excellence, which is in marked contrast to provision in other sectors such as ‘automotive’, ‘aerospace’ and other ‘advanced’ manufacturing.'' Fiona Kendrick, Chairman and CEO Nestlé UK & Ireland There is a an Innovation gap which impact on food sector competiveness and the ability of the sector to meet global challenges including;

• Reducing our environmental impact

• Meeting growing global demand for food

• Producing more from less as pressure increases on resources

• Mitigating the potential impacts of climate change

• Reformulating and creating new products to meet diet and health requirements

The levels of Government of investment in R&D also impacts on productivity in the food and drink sector which lags behind other industry sectors showing a +11% increase in the period since 2009 in comparison with 39% in the transport sector (Aerospace and automotive). The Food and Drink Federation have also identified the need to:

• Improve knowledge transfer

• Ensure the sector has the technical skills required to compete globally and attract inward investment. The current forecast is the need for 140,000 new recruits by 2024

• Create a multi-disciplinary, strategically focussed approach to deliver integrated solutions Industry investment in R&D is focussed on product rather than process development In response the industry and government recognise the need for investment in pre-competitive research and the co-ordination of efforts between companies, research agencies as part of response to the UK



Government's Industrial Strategy and related Food sector deal, which his includes the National Centre of Excellence for Food Engineering aa unique part, being focused on engineering process and engieiring solutions of a network of R&D Centres. There is also a skills gap. The NCEFE has been established as a direct result of a request from industry represented by the National Skills Academy Food and Drink and the Food and Drink Federation, to address an engineering skills shortage in the sector, which has an ageing workforce not equipped with the required skills for example in automation, robotics, computer control, sensor technologies, machine vision. The sector has also had major difficulty in recruiting due to the shortage of graduates in STEM subjects and intense competition from other sectors for example Automotive, Nuclear and Aerospace. Engineering expertise through the Centre of Excellence will address industry challenges including ;

• The efficient operation of machines and systems, reducing down time and breakdowns; • Waste and sustainability; minimising waste in the production process , identifying new forms

of efficient processing, developing sustainable packaging alternatives and minimising the impact of this on product manufacture, distribution and retail cycle

• Environmental impact; for example reducing energy usage in processing and the development of new recipes including ingredients from sustainable sources

• Testing and validation of new pieces of equipment and development to address sector needs,

• Adaptation of new machinery for alternative or more efficient uses; • The development of partnerships to identify and address future challenges, for example

through Foresight programmes • Work with other sectors to identify transferable technologies with food sector applications • Work with industry to identify and apply technologies to smaller companies and SMEs in the

supply chain. • Food security and consumer confidence; ensuing the production process produces

consistent quality and identifies and excludes potential health hazards • Health and nutrition; developing new processes, able to support the removal of unhealthy

ingredients for example sugars and salt. • Evolving consumer demands; for new healthier products and more choice • Economic challenges; for example competiveness, the costs of production and raw materials

In response to the skills gap, the Department of Engineering and Mathematics at Sheffield Hallam University is launching a Degree Apprenticeship - Advanced Food Engineer. The first cohort will begin their studies in January 2019. Delivered over 5 years in a part time study mode, to students employed in the food and drink manufacturing and processing industry, the course will upskill employed staff working in engineering roles and new starters. The first cohort has a target of 15 recruits, and courses will commence in January 2019 and in September of each subsequent academic year. The target number of recruits will increase to 25 in year 3. The design of the course has been informed by the food and drink engineering standards at Level 5 and 6 and the industry led ‘Trailblazer’ group. Initiated in 2015-16 the Food Engineering Trailblazer Group was led by the National Skills Academy for Food and Drink and representatives from the sector including; Faccenda Group Co- Chair, Princes Limited Co-Chair, Nestle UK & Ireland (York), Pladis Global, Kraft Heinz, Muller Arla Foods, Warburtons, McCain Foods, Florette, KP Snacks, ABP Food Group, Moy Park, Dukeshill Ham Co Ltd, Heineken UK, PDM Group, Fresh Pastures, The case for public intervention:

• The food & drink industry is the biggest manufacturing sector in the country...larger than automotive & aerospace combined.

• In 2017, total food & drink export figures were worth more than £22bn. 97% of our businesses are SMEs

• The industry employs around 400,000 people



• The sector will need 140,000 new recruits by 2024 • The sector has a turnover of £97.3bn accounting for 19% of total UK manufacturing • FDF has pledged to triple apprenticeships within the food & drink industry by 2020 • FDF are currently in negotiation with government regarding a food sector deal.

The case for SCR support; is explored more fully in section 3.2 but in summary the NCEFE aligns strongly with the Advanced Manufacturing Innovation District, is complementary to the advanced manufacturing R&D provision, will serve food and drink manufacturers in the city region will create supply chain opportunities for equipment, engineering and technology companies, and will create new high value employment opportunities for the SCR.

3.2 - How will your scheme contribute to the achievement of the City Region’s strategic objectives and to delivering the outcomes of the SCR Strategic Economic Plan?

Useful links: For details of Sheffield City Region’s Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/economic-strategy/growthplan/ [SCR’s Strategic Economic Plan identifies many economic growths ambitions. We are keen to understand if this scheme supports our wider economic ambitions across the themes of business growth, skills and employment, infrastructure and transport – approximately 350 words] There is strong food sector presence in the SCR which includes Mondelez (Sheffield), Premier Foods (Barnsley), KP Foods (Rotherham), Fletchers bakery (Shefield0 and Greencore (Kiveton) there is also a thriving SME base which is described below.

https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/economic-strategy/growthplan/



The SCR's Advanced Manufacturing assets are highly relevant to food manufacturing for example; those companies developing Industrial machinery, electrical, precision engineering, design, pneumatics, hydraulics, automation, control systems, specialist coatings and related applications and services. Many of these companies have also developed collaborative partnerships with academic experts at Sheffield Hallam University Opportunities are aligned with the SCR's emerging local industrial strategy and are being progressed by the LEP nd partners in response to current Government funding calls for example the Strength in Places proposal, which includes Advanced Manufacturing and Industry 4.0,as a driver for growth. There are strong synergies with the Advanced Manufacturing Research centre and the Advanced Wellbeing Research Centre and other developments in AMID. Investment in the NCEFE will directly contribute to the achievement of the City Region's Employment deficit, in particular creating highly skilled jobs, and graduate internship and placement opportunities. In total the 49 gross posts funded from all sources in the impact model, are made up as identified below.

The outputs allocated to SCRIF are also identified. Further narrative is provided in section 5

Core team

FTE Assigned to

SCRIF

Director 1

Deputy Director 0.5

Business Development Manager 0.5

Administrator 0.5

Technician 1

PDRA 4 2

PhDs 4

Research Professor 0.5

Sub Total Core team 12

Activity /Project FTEs

Researchers working on projects minimum 1 year 17 7

Impact in Companies: FTEs new jobs created 20 10

Gross Total 49 19

Of the forecast 49 direct jobs created specified in section 5.8, 20 are achieved in collaborating companies and organisations; This gives a total of 29 working in the NCEFE. It is estimated that 12 will comprise the core management, administrative, technical and research team. Building on the engineering strengths of current projects accommodated on campus (and not included in the forecast employment figures,) it is anticipated that areas of growth will include, Agile and Flexible manufacturing process, automaton for SMEs, which are central themes in the Industrial Strategy and also overseas R&D collaborations to boost partnerships and exports outside the EU. With regard to engagement with SMEs, 96% of the FDF's 6,360 members are SMEs and in the Sheffield City Region a strong programme of SME engagement is underway using initiatives including the ESIF funded Sheffield Innovation Programme (SIP) which has recently worked with companies in the SCR including: Karkli snacks, Our Cow Molly, Maxons sweets, Cossack cuisine, Martec of Withwell Ltd., Iqbal poultry, Fitex and Wye Bakehouse Ltd, Hendersons Relish and FreshPak. Benefits for the City region include; innovation and supply chain opportunities for SMEs, an increase in



intern and placements, more highly skilled jobs, new supply chain and inwards investment prospects. For SME beneficiaries based in the Sheffield City Region LEP area, there is a target of 10 SMEs per year which will be involved in collaborative R&D activities with NCEFE and industry partners. This is based on a target of a minimum of 20 SMEs per year in the SCR involved in early stage network activities and a 50% conversion rate (based on other Sheffield Hallam ERDF supported Innovation projects and experience of running targeted workshops for SMEs). The following table demonstrates the relative importance of Food and manufacturing related sectors to the City Region.

3.3 - How does the scheme fit with national and local policies? Outline whether there are any conflicts and if so highlight any planned mitigation.

[Refer to the appropriate policies and how the scheme complies with these – maximum 350 words] Advanced manufacturing and production technologies with applications in the food sector are at the core of the Industrial Strategy and the UK Government's objectives for sector innovations and competiveness. The SCR's Smart Specialisation Strategy and Science and Innovation Audit identify Advanced Manufacturing and Materials as a key strength with links to nationally significant initiatives; the Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre and the Innovate UK supported High Value Manufacturing Catapult. NCEFE will be a significant addition to this portfolio. Investment will create research and innovation assets that can produce a step change in SCR SMEs and the wider economy, engaging more businesses in R&D and innovation, and increasing investment by large companies and SMEs. NCEFE will directly contribute to the delivery of the SCR's growth objectives, including;

• Providing R&D expertise to enable SCR businesses to grow faster. and developing business to business supply chain opportunities

• stimulating new collaborative partnerships to help the FDF achieve their target of over £1bn of additional GVA over 10 years,

• attracting business investment into the SCR through work with national industry partners, • developing the ability of the SCR's SMEs to be able to deliver export-led, sustainable growth



with the food manufacturing sector; • applying the City Region specific sector specialisms, particularly around capabilities in

materials, advanced manufacturing and digital and cross cutting competencies in design and sustainability to the food sector

• creating new, more highly skilled employment and placement opportunities for graduates in the SCR and including through internships and Knowledge Transfer Partnerships (KTPs)

As a new facility designed in collaboration with the Food sector there are no obvious conflicts with existing provision within the SCR or nationally. There are significant challenges, including the skills needs and shortage of engineers in the food sector and the need to develop alternative and parallel career paths for engineers alongside those supplying for example the automotive, nuclear and aerospace sectors.

3.4 - How does this scheme align with local policies on: inequality, health and wellbeing, and thriving communities and neighbourhoods?

[Refer to the appropriate policies and how the scheme complies with these – maximum 300 words] Sheffield Hallam University is committed to the promotion of equality of opportunity and to creating and sustaining an inclusive culture. The University's policies apply to all activities including collaborative R&D and industry engagement. Working alongside the Food and Drink Federation (FDF) which has made a strong commitment to a multicultural industry, base which includes a range of ethnic food products and producers

There is a significant commitment to sustainability and environmental impact, the recruitment of women into engineering in the sector and inclusion through the University's programme of recruitment from disadvantaged groups. In addition the University is working with the FDF on improving recipes and substituting ingredients in order to tackle health, obesity and wellbeing issues.

Initiatives include;



• Women in Science, Engineering and Technology, in particular work to secure Athena Swan Bronze award status and a programme of work delivered jointly with FDF to attract women engineers into the food industry woith guest lectures from key female executives in the sector including; Fiona Kendrick, CEO and chairman of Nestlé UK and Ireland and, special initiatives for example girls days, employer visits and the development of female role models.

• Inclusion: The Higher Education Progression Partnership (HEPP - Sheffield City Region) HEPP is a collaborative partnership of the region's universities, colleges, schools, local authorities and other organisations, committed to widening participation into higher education from disadvantaged groups and non-traditional learners.

•

• Sustainability: NCEFE will work with the FDF and individual companies to help achieve their five-fold ambition to:

• Achieve a 20% absolute reduction in CO2 emissions by 2010 compared to 1991 • Send zero food and packaging waste to landfill from 2015 • Make a significant contribution to WRAP’s work to achieve an absolute reduction in

the level of packaging reaching households • Achieve significant reductions in water use to help reduce stress on the nation’s

water supplies • Embed environmental standards in our transport practices, including with hauliers

• Health and Wellbeing: The aim of the FDF's Diet and Health Committee is to work constructively with Government, regulators and others to help find solutions to the complex issues at the heart of the diet and health challenge here in the UK.

The Building is also on target to achieve BREEAM Excellent rating. The full detail can be found in the Assessor's report available on request

3.5 - Is the scheme or its economic outputs dependent upon any other project or investment? If so, provide details of these interdependencies and associated risk and mitigation proposals

[What is the sequence of events that need to happen before and after this scheme for it to achieve its objectives. For example, is there another project that needs to be underway or completed before this project can achieve its objectives. – maximum 350 words] HEFCE funding support in the sum of £6,920,000 is in place and a ERDF of £2,7812,488 is now contracted. SCRIF is being sought to fill a funding gap As noted there is currently an additional funding gap which will be underwritten by the University. There is no reliance on private partners or stakeholders. The core running costs (pay and non-pay) are funded by the University, in addition there is a programme of collaborative R&D funded by Research Councils, Innovate UK and industry, the target for income from these sources is around £300,000 - £400,000 per year. All funds are invested in the project delivery and the operation of the building. All operating costs are underwritten by the University which will support any revenue funding gap to ensure continuity of operation.

3.6 - What are the implications if the scheme does not secure SCR investment?

[This includes delays in receiving funding, progressing with a more limited scheme, splitting into phases, no scheme, greater leverage etc) – maximum 200 words] The SCR investment will support completion of the building and free up spend in order to invest in additional state of the art equipment for Research and Development purposes. In the event that SCRIF funding was not available, the building could potentially be scaled back, although this is difficult as the



project is approaching RIBA stage 4, and consequently variations to the building specification and design can only be undertaken at an additional cost. An alternative would be to reduce the budget available for the procurement of equipment, the impact of scaling this back would be to reduce the number and types of collaborative R&D projects undertaken, the partners the NCEFE could work with, and the innovations and benefit for generated for both SCR and national partners. The third and preferred option is to pursue additional funding opportunities for the equipping of the building.

PART 2 - SCHEME OBJECTIVES

3.7 - What are the scheme’s objectives in SMART terms (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Timescales)? Please distinguish between short and longer term objectives.

[Please note, if this project secures approval, the eventual contract will be set out against these objectives. The outputs and outcomes you provide in Tables 5.1 to 5.4 need to relate to these objectives - maximum 300 words] [Please distinguish between short and longer term objectives (approx. 300 words)] The direct outputs are the delivery of the building creating 1763sq. metres of R&D space by June 2019.accommodating 29 new posts working in R&D facilities in the first 3 years of operation, and generating a further 20 posts in companies in the SCR. Further detail is provided in section 3.2. Operationally the objectives are

• 5 new industry collaborations funded by Innovate UK, Industry and other sources per year

• 10 SCR based companies engaged in collaborative activities per year NCEFE will directly contribute to the delivery of the SCR's growth objectives, including;

• Providing R&D expertise to enable SCR businesses to grow faster. and developing business to business supply chain opportunities

• stimulating new collaborative partnerships to help the FDF achieve their target of over £1bn of additional GVA over 10 years,

• attracting business investment into the SCR through work with national industry partners,

• developing the ability of the SCR's SMEs to be able to deliver export-led, sustainable growth with the food manufacturing sector;

• applying the City Region specific sector specialisms, particularly around capabilities in materials, advanced manufacturing and digital and cross cutting competencies in design and sustainability to the food sector

• creating new, more highly skilled employment and placement opportunities for graduates in the SCR and including through internships and KTPs

3.8 - Are there any potential adverse economic, social and/or environmental consequences / dis-benefits of delivering the scheme?

[Explain any negative impacts resulting from the scheme – maximum 500 words] The NCEFE has been developed in response to industry challenges; these are detailed in section 3.1. There are no clear negative economic , social or environmental consequences of the development. In realty NCEFE has been created to address many of the challenges within these categories, as faced by



the food sector. The sector is also seeking to address the related perceptions of the food sector in relation to packaging, diet, obesity, food quality, waste and consumer choice. Whilst the Centre focuses on engineering solutions for the sector, interventions in production are integral to addressing social environmental or health related challenges, for example a change in ingredients or recipes, or the introduction of new packaging will require Engineering and technology interventions for including managing, measuring and mixing ingredients, temperature control and processing, product and packaging handling and the impact on manual and automated processes. The only significant factor which has arisen since NCEFE was first conceptualised in 2015 is BREXIT, this however has served as a greater driver for the need for NCEFE, as the sector responds to the objectives of the Industrial Strategy and the need for greater global competiveness of UK industry.

STRATEGIC DIMENSION ASSESSMENT (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE ASSESSOR)

Does the scheme have a clear strategic rationale and align to SCR Growth Plan objectives and the SEP?

Does the scheme effectively align with other SCR Executive Boards and other policies locally, sub-regionally and nationally

Are SMART objectives clear and consistent with the nature of the scheme?

Are there any adverse consequences if the scheme goes ahead / does not go ahead?



4 - COMMERCIAL DIMENSION

PART 1 - DEMAND CASE

4.1 - What is the demand justification for SCR investment in this scheme?

[Please set out the nature of the market demand that you have identified to justify this scheme.]

The NCEFE is a strategically important R&D facility for the UK food sector, a sector which employs over 400,000 people and which has doubled its export income over 10 years achieving £12.8bn in 2014. The sector has remained competitive through investment in R&D and new collaborations, with over three quarters of the sector's research and development (£325m) being self-funded.. It is anticipated that the food industry will commit to the use of the NCEFE as a significant R&D facility this will confirm the centre's continuation as an academic research and industry focussed resource. R&D projects will also be eligible for support from Horizon 20202 and Innovate UK resources. Through partnership with the food sector and the Sheffield City Region's Growth Hub the NCEFE will also be able to further develop its activity with city Region based SMEs which are able to provide unique transferable technologies and competencies to meet the need of the food industry. The NCEFE concept has been informed by the food sector through the NCEFE Food Engineering Industrial Advisory Board, the purpose of which is to;

▪ Provide a strategic input into the planning of SHU food engineering research, courses and new course products, focussing on industry needs

▪ Network with, and link to, the food and drink industry, Food and Drink Federation, the National Skill Academy for Food and Drink, and other sector bodies;

There are also sub-groups developing engineering skills provision for the food sector, and more recently higher Degree Apprenticeships for the Food sector which are likely to be launched in 2019.

Industrial Advisory Board is meets quarterly and is chaired by Keith Thornhill, head of Food & Beverage, Siemens UK & Ireland.

Clear demand can be demonstrated by the University's success in funded foods related collaborative R&D programmes which have significantly increased in the last 3 years and now include work with;

▪ Spirax Sarco and Nestlé UK to develop a novel heat recovery solution that will recover the input energy in a roasting process, increase energy efficiency and reduce energy costs.

▪ Nestlé UK, First Milk and Foss to reduce raw milk supply chain wastage ▪ Dext Heat Recovery and Hull-based William Jackson Food Group ▪ a major partnership with companies in the UK and India developing efficiencies in

Rice Milling and the reuse of waste NCEFE has organised pilot events promoting opportunities for SMEs in the wider food sector for both food and manufacturing supplicating companies which has engaged with over 30



companies. In 2017 - 18 in partnership with the Sheffield Innovation programme NCEFE delivered workshops targeting SMEs in the SCR;

• Embracing Food Innovation; exploring the challenges for SMEs in the food industry of finding the right ingredients, labelling foods and using the right technologies and processes,

• The Science Of Brewing, targeting directly SMEs in the Food Sector,

• Working With Robots: Human-Robot Co-Working.

• Connected Manufacturing – Transformation Through Technology presented by large companies including Coca-Cola European Partners (Wakefield) to promote to SMEs the benefits of digital technologies in increasing efficiency and productivity.

4.2 - Please detail any market testing which has been undertaken to evidence demand and provide evidence that demonstrates that the private sector will respond to this opportunity.

[How do you know there is sufficient market demand to support this scheme as proposed? – approximately 300 words]

Section 4.1 outlines significant industry and SCR engagement in collaborative R&D and the strategic delivery of NCEFE. In addition over 40 companies including Mars, Nestle UK and Warburtons have pledged their support and offered work placements, facilities, factory visits, guest lectures and advice to the Centre and those in study at SHU.. SHU also commissioned a study from our Business School's International Business and Economics Research Group (IBERG): University-Industry Linkages within the UK Food Sector: An Exploratory Analysis. January 2016 Compiled by: Dr Andrew Johnston of the Sheffield Business School. This demonstrates that over £985 million was invested in research projects involving firms from the Food industry between 2000-2015. Of this total, over £853 million, or 86%, of the funding went to projects involving universities. The firms engaging with universities were mainly SMEs (<250 employees), with this group of firms accounting for 80% of all interactions. The findings will inform the delivery of NCEFE, for example

• the NCEFE should focus on the relevance their work to the food sector, in terms of the research undertaken by the centre and wider university, and a track record of industry engagement.

• The importance of geographic proximity suggests that there is value in adopting a regional as well as national focus in the centre's activities.

• When developing new consortia the NCEFE should highlight the extra value a university partner brings to the project as well as the increased expertise.

• The SME community presents significant opportunities for external collaboration for the centre and links with these firms should be explored along with links to larger firms.



4.3 - If this scheme is reliant on private partners / stakeholders to deliver outputs, provide details of any discussions, procurement, negotiations or processes undertaken?

[Identify the actions of partners that have a direct impact on the viability of this scheme. – approximately 300 words]

Not applicable

4.4 - Provide details of any appraisal and/or modelling undertaken since the submission of the Strategic / Outline Business Case.

[Please summarise the type and results of any modelling and/or appraisal. – maximum 200 words]

The University has commissioned KADA Research to undertake economic impact modelling exercise to assess the outcomes and benefits of the capital development and the early stages of operation. The project has also been successfully appraised as part of the ESIF approval process by the Ministry of Communities Housing and Local Governmen t

PART 2 - PROCUREMENT STRATEGY

4.5 A - If this scheme comprises a procurement process, provide an overview of the procurement or bid appraisal process to be undertaken. Please include the date procurement is planned to complete in the milestone table in section 7.1.

[Set out the intended procurement strategy, for example, will the tender be a competitive process or negotiated with a single developer/contractor? If competitive, how will the tenders be evaluated – maximum 150 words]

Procurement at SHU is the responsibility of the Strategic procurement team which is part of the Finance Directorate. All transactions are informed by the University's Financial regulations and UK and EU Government compliance regulations. https://www.shu.ac.uk/about-us/our-services/finance-directorate/suppliers-zone The team is led by Rachael Devaney, Head of Strategic Procurement, and includes a dedicated Estates procurement resource with specialist knowledge of the construction sector, estates and facilities. The dedicated e; Estates division are responsible for managing the design, procurement and construction process of all new buildings and refurbishment works. SHU entered into a Pre-Contract Services Agreement (PCSA) dated 19 January 2018 with BAM Construction Services Ltd. The contract was procured via the YORBUILD 2 framework and relates to ‘stage 1’ of a two-stage design and build procurement process. Stage 1 relates to pre-contract design works (including surveys) to progress design to RIBA Stage 4 at which point the ‘Stage 2’ contract to physically deliver the works on site will be agreed. The order for stage 2 is programmed to be placed on 20 August 2018.

4.5 B - If procurement has already been undertaken please provide details of the preferred bid(s) (contact details, commercial and financial aspects of the bid) and include value for money statements for each bid.

[Provide contact details, commercial and financial aspects of the bid, value for money statements for

https://www.shu.ac.uk/about-us/our-services/finance-directorate/suppliers-zone



each bid – maximum 200 words]

Procurement of the current contracts, contracted and planned, using a range of procurement routes appropriate to the type and value of the contract, these include. • OJEU compliant YorConsult Framework OJEU - • The Mini Competition advertised via the SHU In-tend portal to a closed list of SHU framework suppliers • Using a restricted tender procedure with a PQQ and ITT stage (below OJEU threshold) The original design team (Project Manager, Architect, Engineering) were procured through SHU frameworks (tendered to the applicable lots) and YorConsult framework (direct call-off), both of which are OJEU compliant. These appointments pre-dated the application and will be excluded from draw-down calculations, they are however included in the full RIBA Stage 2 budget. The procurement of the main contractor will be via Lot 4 of the YorBuild 2 framework (previously procured via a full OJEU tender). The construction procurement route will be a two-stage design and Build, using the JCTDB11. Where applicable the Procurement team can provide information relating to the procurement process including; 1. Invitation to Tender (ITT) specification including clear award criteria 2. Signed Tender Receipt Log (showing the date and time of all tenders) 3. Tender Scoring/Evaluation matrix 4. Moderated Tender Summary Score Sheet 5. Tender Evaluation Report 6. Copy of Award Letter and Contract Award Notice with client amendments The retention of documentation relating to procurement is covered by the document and retention and archiving policies referred to in the Full Business Plan. The procurement of the main build contract has been reviewed by MHCLG, as part of ESUIF due diligence. The two-stage tender process fostered a desire to support innovative design solutions, by pro-active sub-contractor involvement which provides quality, cost and programme benefits. Early engagement of the main contractor, BAM, allowed collaboration between the Employer, the Employer's Consultant team and allowed active tracking / monitoring of sub-contract package tender returns against the cost plan to identify over/under spends, propose and contribute to value engineering exercises to achive cost plan budgets. The two-stage tender report provides further detail of the tender process, where BAM issued sub-cintract work packages through their e-tender portal, a system delivered by their supply chain management provider, Livelink. The following process was adopted:

• Turner & TownsendT (the Employer’s Agent) requested access to the tender documents for review, prior to them being issued to the tenderers; however, the tender information was only received at the time of BAM’s tender recommendation.

• The sub-contract tendered packages and submitted information were collated by BAM.



• Following BAM’s review, BAM provided an aligned tender comparison, detailing all the subcontract tenders received and any appropriate package adjustments that they had included, in order that BAM could advise of their preferred sub-contractor for the Work Package.

• Turner & Townsend carried out a full arithmetical check and a detailed quantity check on all work packages, to ensure that the package scope represented the current information.

• Any discrepancies were raised with BAM and resolved.

• The returned packages were also checked, to ensure that there was no ‘double-counting’, i.e. works included in more than one sub-contract package.

• The BAM Plugged allowances (allowances for works not yet designed or detailed, but required to be carried out, or to equalise incomplete sub-contract tenders) were reviewed and either substantiated by the preferred sub-contractor, or proven to be a commercially acceptable rate, or amended by agreement between Turner & Townsend and BAM.

• BAM Preliminaries allowances were reviewed against the Turner & Townsend Stage One tender preliminaries demarcation schedule, and any overlaps or duplications highlighted and removed from the package cost.

• BAM package risk allowances were reviewed and discussed, with the aim of mitigating risk and reducing the requirement for any risk to be contained in the package, over and above the agreed Stage One risk allowance.

Further detail is available on request.

4.6 - If costs increase during the procurement process how will additional costs be covered? Please note that SCR will not be liable for any such cost increases. If costs have increased and therefore the SCR request has also increased, please set out a clear justification for this, outlining what other funding options have been explored in this regard. SCR cannot guarantee that this increased request can be met in full or in part

[Clearly state who will fund any cost overruns and how/why these have arisen – maximum 100 words]

The overall forecast cost of the project construction contract and related works has increased from £5,85m to £6,49m, at RIBA stage 3, giving a total project cost of £10.6m. The costs are being Value Engineered throughout the design process with the aim of bringing the project nearer to the target budget of £10.3m. We are developing a number of options which include; meeting the forecast spend profile, securing additional funding, or in the event that cost cannot be brought in line with forecasts or additional funding secured the University will underwrite the over commitment. Value Engineering e will be concluded by 17 August 2018 at the point the Contract Sum is agreed as part of the D&B Stage 2 process. Current budget forecast is as stated in the RIBA



Stage 3 Cost Plan show a shortfall in funding, which is the key reason we are applying to SCRIF. the University is will contribute to any additional short fall.

4.7 - Provide a timetable for any proposed final negotiations and award of contract(s).

[Provide the list of actions and the estimated dates (month & year) by which this will be completed]



As noted elsewhere there is minor slippage in the above timetable, the detail is provided to show the milestones and process as we approach cost certainty which will includes the discharge of planning conditions and sign off of RIBA stage 4 which is expected by 17 August 2018.

4.8 – Please identify any subcontractors you intend to use for the delivery of this project and summarise what due diligence you have undertaken of these.

[Please outline their role in the delivery of this project and provide details of what due diligence has been carried out on their financial standing as a going concern]

All construction contracts are managed by the appointed lead contractor BAM.

COMMERCIAL DIMENSION ASSESSMENT (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE ASSESSOR)

Is the scheme feasible and has market potential / demand been adequately assessed / evidenced?

Is the procurement strategy clear with defined milestones?



5 - ECONOMIC DIMENSION

PART 1 - OPTION ANALYSIS

5.1 - Please outline the options which have been considered, setting out the strengths / weaknesses for each option, outcomes expected and reasons for either rejecting the option or taking it forward as the preferred approach. (approx. 300 words) [Please provide evidence of the options assessment and why the preferred option was chosen. One of the options should include a lower contribution from SCR.]

Total Cost (£m)

SCR Cost (£m)

Strength/ Weaknesses

compared to Do Min

[Qualify - max 50 words per option]

Expected Outcomes compared to Base Do

Min

[Qualify - max 50 words per option]

Option A (Do Minimum) New build no SCRIF

Additional cost £9.6m

Consequences of Option A

Max. 200 words Option A would create a Food standard building but with limited equipment and d food production facilities. Activity would be restricted to 2 - 3 large scale £100k plus R&D projects per year with a maximum of 2 to 3 companies. Option A due to restricted access to equipment would support a core team of 12 an additional 8 project based researchers and potentially 10 internships with companies. 30 in total. This is due to the significant proportion of capital costs being invested in the construction of the building and consequent limited investment in the equipment for R&D purposes. This will result in need for longer term programme of procuring equipment and maximising capacity for R&D. The University is pursuing an opportunity to maximise the impact and benefit of the facility by seeking additional funding to create a state of the art facility which meets the needs of the sector, which includes the Food, Engineering. manufacturing companies and SMEs, nationally and in the Sheffield City Region. Option A provides a solid platform for the accelerated, state of the art technology and R&D intensive capability proposed in option C.

Option B: Refurbishment of existing premises

£6..9m £0 Not practical due to lack of a food sector standard manufacturing building for R&D purses

None

Reason for rejecting Option B

Max. 100 words Consideration was given to using the HEFCE (now Office for Students) award as a standalone, the budget was not however sufficient to convert existing premises into a food standard facility, the only option was therefore new build, which creates a more environmentally sustainable operation, can more easily meet food sector standards, and delivers a controlled hygienic environment which is



more easily able to cope with operating demands for example extremes of temperature. Refurbishment is also potentially a more expensive option than new build.

Option C: (Preferred) Enhanced new build

£10.6m £619,000 Strengths: Creates a facility which is able to deliver an accelerated programme of R&D that meets the needs of industry and delivers a collaborative programme of continuous improvement, innovation and competiveness in the sector, from day 1 of operation. Able to sustain nationally significant partnerships nationally with the Food and manufacturing sector and SMEs in the SCR.

A team of 29 working in a state of the art facility able to accommodate 5 - 6 large scale R&D projects per year, with 10 to 20 companies, with rapid turnaround between projects and opportunities for important showcase and demonstrator projects to engage local companies, including SMEs. Strategic partnerships with the AMRC and national Catapult projects..

Reasons for rejecting Option C

This is the preferred option there is no option D.

Option D

.

5.2 - Please complete Appendix 1, specifying within the categories provided, all outputs and outcomes created by the scheme. For projects that create FTE jobs, Appendix 2 must also be completed.

5.3 – Please complete the following table as a summary of any direct, indirect or safeguarded gross job outputs delivered by the scheme [Please provide a breakdown of any FTE jobs created with (preferred scenario) and without (do minimum) SCR funding, by employment sector and whether the FTE is direct, indirect or safeguarded]

Table 5.1: Gross FTE Jobs by Employment Sector

Employment Sector

Preferred Option Do Minimum

Direct Indirect Safeguarded Direct Indirect Safeguarded

Production (Agriculture, mining, electricity, gas, water and



waste)

Manufacturing 49 57 30 35

Construction 231 393 231 393

Distribution, transport; accommodation and food

Information and communication

Financial and insurance activities

Real estate activities

Professional and administration services

Public administration; education; health

Recreation, other services and household activities

NOTE: IN the absence of a Technical Research category, Academic and other NCEFE staff are retuned in the manufacturing category.

For the gross jobs specified above, please indicate below the relevant occupations

5.4 - For the gross jobs specified in Table 5.3 above, please indicate the relevant occupations Table 5.2: Gross FTE Jobs by Occupation [Please provide a breakdown of any FTE jobs created with (preferred scenario) and without (do minimum) SCR funding, by Occupation type]

Occupations Preferred Scenario Do Minimum

Managers, Directors and Senior Officials

10 9

Professional Occupations 18 10

Associate Professional & Technical

20 10

Administrative and Secretarial

1 1

Skilled Trades Occupations

Caring, Leisure and Other Service Occupations

Sales and Customer Service Occupations



Process Plant and Machine Operatives

Elementary Occupations

The table above includes Direct jobs (operations) only, where evidence is available to support

the forecasts. Indirect and Construction jobs are based on recognised formula which translates

project budget into FTE equivalents. Further detail of this approach including Net forecasts

taking into consideration displacement and leakage outside the SCR can be found in the KADA

Economic Impact Assessment, appended to this Business case. .

The managers, directors senior official and professional occupations posts are employed on

University academic and professional services contracts and are FTEs employed on permanent

or fixed term contracts for a minimum of one year.. Also included within these categories are

project based Research jobs funded by third parties for example UK Research and Innovation

(UKRI), which includes Research Councils and Innovate UK, and also industry led projects

using the |NCEFE facilities. Projects are typically funded over periods of between two years to

three years, and posts created to deliver projects are therefore regarded as permanent from an

HR perspective. Internships included in the outputs will be for a minimum of one year and will

be paid for by the company.

Rationale

The breakdown below shows the impact of limited facilities and extended lead-in times that

would result from the 'Do minimum' option, the non-availability of SCRIF funds. In summary the

core team would be relatively unchanged as these posts are required to operate the building,

develop strategic partnerships with industry and develop a core of research. The major impact

and benefits of additional SCRIF funding is in the impact in companies and the accelerated

growth in the team of researchers undertaking collaborative R&D with companies fudned by for

example Innovate UK.

Preferred Option Do minimum

Outputs assigned to

SCRIF

Director 1 1

Deputy Director 0.5 0.5

BDM 0.5 0.5

Administrator 0.5 0.5

Technician 1 1

PDRA 4 2 2

PhDs researchers 4 4

Research Professor 0.5 0.5

sub Total 12 10

Researchers 17 10 7

Impact in Companies 20 10 10

TOTAL 49 30 19



NOTE: Impact in Companies through increased internships and employment created as a

result of new products and processes over the period to 2023

5.5 – Please specify any floorspace to be created, unlocked or safeguarded by the scheme [Please detail the amount of any floorspace created with (preferred scenario) and without (do minimum) SCR funding, by use class and whether the floorspace is direct, indirect or safeguarded.]

Table 5.3: Gross Floorspace (sqm)

Use Class

Preferred Option Do Minimum

Direct Indirect Safeguarded Direct Indirect Safeguarded

B1 (business)

B2 (general industrial)

B8 (storage and distribution)

Other (please specify:) Technology based R&D space

1763sq.m. 1763sq.m.

Direct: commercial floorspace created as part of the scheme Indirect: commercial floorspace unlocked by the scheme Safeguarded: commercial floorspace safeguarded by the scheme

5.6 – Please complete the following table as a summary of any additional benefits to be created by the scheme

Table 5.4: Other Outputs and Outcomes [Please detail any other outputs or outcomes created with (preferred scenario) and without (do minimum) SCR funding, and whether these are direct, indirect or safeguarded. Descriptions of some standard outputs and outcomes is provided in Appendix 1 for reference.]

Outputs/Outcomes Preferred Option to 2021 Do Minimum

Outputs:

1. New R&D space 1763sq. metres 1763sq. metres

2. Staff over 3 years working in enhanced R&D facilities

29 20

3. New industry collaborations funded by Innovate UK, Industry and other sources

15 2-3

4. SCR based companies (SMEs)engaged in collaborative activities

30 1 -2



5. Jobs created in SCR companies

20 (to 2023) 10

Outcomes:

6. New placement, intern and KTP opportunities

24 2

7. Food Engineering Higher Degree Apprenticeship places

15 in 2019 15 in 2020 25 in 2021

As forecast but with restricted access to facilities and

equipment. Limited capacity in 2021

8. Total Economic Impacts (GVA)

Direct GVA£19,991,051 10 years NPV £41,877,696

None

NOTES: 4. engagement targeting SMEs in the SCR delivered through programmes for example, the Sheffield Innovation Programme,. 6. Includes a target of 9 KTPs and 15 short term (3 - 6 month internships) . Outputs: The measure of the infrastructure created e.g. floorspace, housing units, homes and businesses given access to high-speed internet Outcomes: The impact or value of benefits realised by the infrastructure e.g. FTE Jobs, GVA Direct: outputs or outcomes created by the scheme e.g. gross commercial floorspace created Indirect: outputs or outcomes unlocked by the scheme e.g. commercial floorspace unlocked by public realm improvements; housing unlocked by provision of new link road. Safeguarded: outputs or outcomes safeguarded by the scheme e.g. floorspace safeguarded from flooding

5.7 – What, if any, key assumptions have been made about the outputs presented in tables 5.1 to 5.4 above? Please summarise your methodology for estimating the employment impact set out above in Table 5.4.

[Explain the assumptions and methodology and please provide your sources and references where possible – maximum 200 words] The Economic impact assessment is based on analysis commissioned by the University from KADA consultant. They have used recognised and validated methodologies in their calculation; The full report is attached as an Annex to this Full Business Case. The summary of assumptions taken from the report can be found below. There are two major components to valuing the economic benefits of development proposals – those associated with the construction phase and those created as a consequence of its subsequent operation or use. The impact assessment process broadly follows five steps.

This impact assessment has been produced using an employment-based approach which is founded on the estimated number of direct jobs created as a result of the project, which is used to generate indirect and induced jobs. As well as presenting estimates of jobs created, the impact assessment takes this a step further to estimate the resultant gross value added (GVA) which is the primary government measure of the



contribution to the economy through a project or in an area more generally. The project assumptions are contained in the full report commissioned by the University from KADA Research.

5.8 - Please specify your suggested additionality values attributable to the scheme. Please provide the source of data or rationale for the chosen values. For further information on these factors, please refer to the HCA Additionality Guide (p22-36):

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/378177/additionality_guide_2014_full.pdf

Value* Source / Rationale

Leakage Construction

46%

BIS (Research to Improve the Assessment of Additionality October 2009

Operational 16.9% as above

Displacement (%) Construction

25% as above

Operational 12.2% as above

Economic Multiplier Construction

2.7 as above

Operational 2.17 as above

Overview of the Rationale

The economic assumptions were informed by a combination of (a) recognised benchmarks

used as proxy measure to inform and calculate the scale of indirect jobs and (b) our own

knowledge of developments of this scale and nature. These varied for both construction and

operations. An explanation and sources are provided below

The explanation has been updated to reflect the appraisal points raised.

Construction Assumptions

Multiplier

We used the upper end range multiplier for Capital Projects suggested by BIS at 2.70 (Source:

Research to Improve the Assessment of Additionality October 2009 Table 7.1: Multipliers at the

sub regional level Capital Projects, regeneration through physical infrastructure) as a proxy to

inform our assessment of indirect jobs (in the absence of SCR multipliers). This is thought to be

accurate as we currently know the scale and type of works anticipated. For instance the works

have a heavy reliance on an extended and varied supply chain (there are 137 contractors

already who have, or are in the process of, being procured). These will generate considerable

further economic activity including additional consumer spending attributable to the workers in

construction and other industries (for example, using their wages from the construction project

on household shopping). We do not normally have this level of intelligence on which to base

our assumptions.

Leakage

For construction, the leakage rates are assumed to be moderate at 46% (though nearly two

thirds of the contractors are based in the region or the city region). Note the location of

contractors was checked for purposes of the impact assessment. Source: Research to Improve

the Assessment of Additionality BIS Oct 2009, Table 5.1: Leakage at the sub regional level





p21, Upper End for Capital Projects.

Operational Assumptions

Multiplier

This considers the effects of jobs associated with the operation of the building and businesses

at the redeveloped site as well as new jobs in SMEs associated with innovative new products

and services. Additionality factors were not used to derive Direct jobs these were informed by

knowledge of actual posts being created. Similar to the construction impacts estimating the

scale of indirect jobs involved applying our own knowledge and using an employment multiplier.

In this case we used the following a proxy to inform our thinking (in the absence of SCR

employment multipliers) - 2.17 Source: Research to Improve the Assessment of Additionality

October 2009 Table 7.1: Multipliers at the sub regional level, promotion & development of

science, R&D and innovation infrastructure, (Upper End Range).

Leakage

Leakage was assumed low at 16.9% (Source: Research to Improve the Assessment of

Additionality BIS Oct 2009, Table 5.1: Leakage at the sub regional level p21 Mean for

Promotion & development of science, R&D and innovation infrastructure) - 16.9% of centre

workers will live outside of the local area. The University is a Sheffield based institution so the

number or proportion of outputs/outcomes that benefit those outside the city region is small and

the same with local firms creating new jobs.

The KADA Economic Impact Assessment methodology;

• Project costs = £11m (Source: SHU). Plus £200,000 pa running costs assumed.

• Direct gross jobs = 29 (SHU) phased over third three years of operation plus new jobs

in SMEs as result of new products and processes 4 X 5ftes (in year 4 and 5).

• GVA per head - estimated using BRES & ONS for construction, technical (for

operations) and general (indirect).

• Leakage (operational direct and indirect), 16.9%, Assumptions informed by knowledge

of supply chain and Research to Improve the Assessment of Additionality BIS Oct 2009,

Table 5.1: Leakage at the sub regional level p21 Mean for Promotion & development of

science, R&D and innovation infrastructure

• Leakage (construction direct and indirect), 46.0%, Assumptions informed by

knowledge of the supply chain and Research to Improve the Assessment of

Additionality BIS Oct 2009, Table 5.1: Leakage at the sub regional level p21, Upper End

for Capital Projects.

• Displacement (%, operational direct and indirect), 12.2%, Research to Improve the

Assessment of Additionality BIS Oct 2009, Table 5.1: Leakage at the sub regional level

p21 Mean for Promotion & development of science, R&D and innovation infrastructure.

• Displacement (construction direct and indirect), 25.0%, Additionality Guide Fourth

Edition HCA 2015p30 Table 4.8 Displacement, (Low Level Ready Reckoner).

• The employment multiplier for operations is generated through our own knowledge

and informed by proxy measures including (Operational), 2.17, Research to Improve the

Assessment of Additionality October 2009 Table 7.1: Multipliers at the sub regional



level, promotion & development of science, R&D and innovation infrastructure, (Upper

End Range).

• The employment multiplier for construction is generated through our own knowledge

and informed by proxy measures including (Construction), 2.70, Research to Improve

the Assessment of Additionality October 2009 Table 7.1: Multipliers at the sub regional

level Capital Projects, regeneration through physical infrastructure (Upper End

Range).Construction assumed to be one year.

• Decay: Applies 10% annual decay adjustment (HMT Green Book).

• Discounting: 3.5% discount rate (HMT Green Book).

Table 1: Project Impacts:

Local Economy (SCR)

Gross

Jobs Net Jobs GVA 10 year NPV

Operations (FTE) 106 78 £5,983,738 £27,870,383

Direct Jobs 49 36 £2,757,483 £13,577,369

Indirect and Induced Jobs 57 42 £3,226,255 £14,293,014

Construction (Temporary) 624 253 £14,007,312 £14,007,312

Direct Jobs 231 94 £6,389,742 £6,389,742

Indirect and Induced Jobs 393 159 £7,617,570 £7,617,570

Total Economic Impacts

(GVA) £19,991,051 £41,877,696

Direct Impacts (£) £9,147,225 £19,967,111

Indirect and Induced

Impacts (£) £10,843,825 £21,910,584

Table 2 SCRIF Impacts only:

Local Economy (SCR)

Gross Jobs Net Jobs GVA 10 year NPV

Operations (FTE) 13 10 £736,891 £3,432,208

Direct Jobs 6 4 £339,581 £1,672,039

Indirect and Induced Jobs 7 5 £397,310 £1,760,170

Construction (Temporary) 77 31 £1,724,986 £1,724,986

Direct Jobs 28 12 £786,890 £786,890

Indirect and Induced Jobs 48 20 £938,096 £938,096

Total Economic Impacts (GVA) £2,461,877 £5,157,194

Direct Impacts (£) £1,126,471 £2,458,929



Indirect and Induced Impacts (£) £1,335,406 £2,698,265 Note the SCR impact has been calculated using the recognised methodology detailed below as part of the Economic impact assessment, further review of the actual jobs created has resulted in a higher number of jobs created being allocated to the DCRIF outputs. *The SCR Assurance Team reserve the right to apply different additionality factors/values depending on the specifics of a scheme

PART 2 - ENVIRONMENTAL & SOCIAL IMPACT

5.9 - Please detail any environmental impacts this scheme may have. Has an Environmental Impact Assessment or Environmental Scoping Study been undertaken? – If not please confirm why this is not necessary for this scheme.

[If so, please summarise the results here and append the report if available. - maximum 300 words] A BREEAM review was undertaken at the commencement of the Design stage in June 2017 and is available on request. The environmental impact of the development and BREEAM status continually being monitored and the is subject of review at the bi-weekly project team meetings.. The Building is on target to achieve BREEAM Excellent rating. A key strand of NCEFE's expertise is to enable food manufacturing businesses to reduce their energy consumption through innovative energy recovery solutions. Collaborative research and development grants have been awarded to SHU to develop technology to significantly reduce consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in a bakery and a coffee roasting facility, funding from the EU has also supported the development of low environmental impact packaging materials. NCEFE will work with the Food and Drink Federation and individual companies to help achieve their five-fold ambition to: • Achieve a 20% absolute reduction in CO2 emissions by 2010 compared to 1991 and to show leadership nationally and internationally by aspiring to a 30% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2020 • Send zero food and packaging waste to landfill from 2015 • Make a significant contribution to WRAP’s work to achieve an absolute reduction (340,000 tonnes) in the level of packaging reaching households by 2010 compared to 2005 and provide more advice to consumers on how best to recycle or otherwise recover used packaging • Achieve significant reductions in water use to help reduce stress on the nation’s water supplies and contribute to an industry-wide absolute target to reduce water use by 20% by 2020 compared to 2007 • Embed environmental standards in our transport practices, including contracts with hauliers as they fall for renewal, to achieve fewer and friendlier food transport miles and contribute to an absolute target for the food chain to reduce its environmental and social impacts by 20% by 2012 compared to 2002

PART 3 – TRANSPORT IMPACTS

5.10 - If your scheme has been deemed to have significant transport implications, please complete the supplementary Transport economic impacts proforma. Not applicable



ECONOMIC DIMENSION ASSESSMENT (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE ASSESSOR)

Are the additionality values/factors appropriate for the scheme?

Do the employment benefits of the scheme offer acceptable value for money?

Is the scheme’s contribution to GVA proportionally substantive to the funding requested?

What are the key risks, sensitivities, and uncertainties relating to the scheme?

Are there any significant environmental and/or social impacts, including dis-benefits?

Are there any significant impacts on the transport network? Have these been proportionately assessed and adequate remedial measures in place to mitigate any negative impacts?

Does any significant data seem to be missing from the information provided?



6 - FINANCIAL DIMENSION

6.1 - COSTS

Provide the full scheme costs. Please append the full financial summary in Appendix 3, itemised and profiled monthly until the end of the scheme. Where appropriate include the risk weighting for line items. [Please provide a breakdown of Total Cost and SCR Funding requirement (add more lines if necessary)]

Cost Category £ SCR £ Other £ Total All capital costs

Preparatory Costs (costs incurred to reach award of contract / funding agreement)

6,920,000 HEFCE/ Office for Students (OFS) allocated against all costs

Professional Fees 504,694

Acquisition of Land or Buildings 740,000

Site Remediation

Delivery Costs - Works / Building and Construction

618,704 2,781,488 ESIF Construction contract only

6,753,007

Delivery Costs - Revenue Activity

Vehicles, Plant, Equipment 524,313

Risk Allowance / Contingency 337,650

Inflation

Post-Delivery Maintenance Costs

Other (please specify) Non Recoverable VAT

1,626,933

Total [please ensure this agrees with section 1.2]

618,704 9,701,488 OFS and ESIF

10,486,599

Degree of certainty to cost estimates

30% (early estimate of costs based on schemes of a similar nature) 60% (Scheme designed and initial cost estimated based on specific requirements / details of this project). 75% (Scheme designed in details and costs reviewed by appropriate independent assessor) 95% (Procurement complete and costs based on tender prices)

95%

RIBA Stage 4 now reached and an agreed Contract Sum identified with BAM at £6,753,007



6.2 - Scheme Funding Summary Table [Confirmation of other and private funding status will be required prior to contracting. The Capital costs for all years should equal the costs identified 1.2]

Funding Source [Add additional columns if multiple funds from same organisation]

SCR

Other Public OFS and SHU (SHU balancing

item)

Other European [Specify the actual

funding stream]

Private [Specify the

actual funding stream]

Total £’000

Cap Rev Cap Rev Cap Rev Cap Rev Cap Rev

Funding Status 1 confirmed in writing 2 applied for 3 to be determined 4 conditions apply

2 1 1

2017/18 Note additional line added to show full cost

1,139,880 1,139,880

2018/19 618,704 4,484,000 1,340,551 6,443,255

2019/20 1,639,936 1,440,937 3,080,874

2020/21

2021/22

2021 is the final year SCR will receive LGF allocations.

2022/23

2023/24

Future Years (2024/25 onwards)

Total 618,704 0 7,263,816 0 2,781,488 0 0 0 10,664,008

% of SCR funding by total cost

6%

6.3 – On what evidence are assumptions relating to cost based? Please outline any additional work required to firm up project costs/funding and when this work is likely to be completed.

[Explain the assumptions and methodology and please provide your sources and references where possible – maximum 200 words] RIBA stage 4 costs are now agreed and a Contract Sum agreed with BAM at £6,753,007



6.4 – For loan funding requests, please provide further details of how and when this will be repaid. State clearly the proposed rate, term and repayment preference (instalments or maturity) and appropriate justification for these.

[Indicate what proportion of the funds you envisage would be recovered by SCR, expressed in £’s, how this ‘income’ would be generated and when (e.g. Q3, 2020/21) the funding will be returned to SCR – maximum 300 words] Not applicable

6.5 - For loan requests, please confirm that SCR will have first charge on assets. If not, please specify what security/collateral SCR can lend against, if required. Please note, if your application is successful, evidence of this will be required prior to any transfer of funds.

[Please confirm what charge, if any, SCR will have on assets, or alternatively, what security/collateral you propose SCR to lend against. Provide details of any additional funders/partners that will require similar or have existing charges on assets and what these are. – maximum 200 words] Not applicable

6.6 - How will cost overruns during delivery/construction be dealt with? Please note that SCR cannot be liable for this.

[Clearly state who will fund any cost overruns – maximum 300 words] The project team and management board will monitor cost and budget commitments. and consider all options; including

• where possible items will be removed from the budget. Likelihood low and impact low as revisions are likely to incur increased fees.

• Value Engineering to consider alternative methods and materials, likelihood high and underway

• Pursuing additional funding opportunities for example for additional equipment, likelihood high and underway.

• SHU underwriting cost overruns. Possible, dependent on level of commitment required

6.7 - Once completed, will the scheme incur revenue costs beyond the SCR investment which will need to be met by the public sector? If so please provide further details below.

[If you answer ‘YES’ to this question, briefly outline any revenue costs and how they will be funded by the public sector – maximum 200 words] All revenue commitments will be met by Sheffield Hallam University, there are no dependencies on other public sector funds, although the University will seek to access opportunities for Government funding to support collaborative R&D programmes with industry, for example from UK Research and Innovation..

6.8 – Please confirm the “longstop date” by which all funds due to SCR will have been recovered.



[Please provide a final ‘backstop date’ when all recoverable funds will be returned to SCR (where applicable)] Not applicable

FINANCIAL DIMENSION ASSESSMENT (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE ASSESSOR)

Have scheme finances been assessed appropriately?

Has other funding been confirmed or what is the timescale for confirmation?

Are additional costs associated with overruns or post-delivery revenue requirements adequately accounted for?



7 - MANAGEMENT DIMENSION

7.1 - DELIVERABILITY Provide your anticipated timetable for delivery including the key milestones you expect. Please add scheme specific milestones as appropriate. This will form the basis for future progress reporting. Please note, if your application is successful, SCR will monitor the project against these milestones for the duration of the works.

Key Milestones Any Dependencies Date

All Funding Secured HEFCE / Office for Students (OFS) ESIF Contracted: Dependencies compliance requirement of ESIF

None OFS contracted January 2017 ESIF April 2018

Cabinet / Other External Approvals Not applicable

Pre-Contract Services Agreement (PCSA) with BAM

None 19 January 2018

Procurement Complete with BAM Contractor appointed Final order

Agreed cost and RIBA 4 sign off. 20 August 2018

Statutory Processes Complete Discharge planning conditions 20 July 2018

Land Acquisition Complete None January 2018

Enabling works package (grouting) on site

06/08/18 – 07/09/18

Main contract on site 10/09/18 – 03/06/19

Envelope weathertight 12/02/19

Evaluation Report - Mid Term Review Summative assessment as part of ESIF contractual requirement

None November 2018

Scheme Opening Meeting Milestones in the construction and fit out timetable

1st July 2019

Evaluation Report - Process Evaluation Not applicable

Evaluation Report - Outcome Evaluation Summative assessment as above 31st July 2019

Building Completion (envelope) Meeting Milestones in the construction and fit out timetable

26/0219

BAM / building Practical Completion 03/06/19

Fit out completed Procurement of kit 14th June 2019

7.2 - As per the milestones above, give a realistic indication of when the scheme should commence. Justify your response considering factors such as the time required to secure statutory powers, secure match funding, procure contracts etc. Highlight any key dependencies needed to achieve these milestones.

[Provide a justification, considering factors such as the time required to secure statutory powers, secure match funding, acquire land, negotiate contract(s), obtain planning etc - maximum 300 words)]



The scheme has commenced. All major dependencies, site acquisition, procurement, planning permission, design to RIBA stage 4, substantive Funding agreements with Office for Students and MHCLG (ESIF) are all in place, preparatory work has started on site, and the budget for construction is at the final stage of testing and negotiation. All planning conditions will be discharged within 6 - 8 weeks of approval, which will be before Stage 2, contracting with BAM on 20th August 2018

7.3 - Indicate whether the following have been secured, agreed fully or agreed in part, or provide an estimation of when they are likely to be secured. Provide detail which will support your business case. Insert N/A if not applicable to the scheme.

Delivery Constraint / Risk Scheme Position and Indicative Date

Planning consents achieved 8th June 2018

CPOs Not applicable

Public consultation As part of Planning Consent

Public inquiry Not applicable

Traffic regulation orders Not applicable

Transport and works act Not applicable

Public sector match Funding HEFCE/Office for Students - award £6.9m contracted 2017

ESIF funding £2.78m contracted April 2018

Private sector match Funding Not applicable

Procurement contracts Appointed. Final contract signature RIBA Stage 4 August 2018

Revenue funds Confirmed: the University will fund the costs of the revenue operation

Partnership agreement Not applicable

Other statutory processes BREEAM. As contractual requirement of ESIF funding on building completion

7.4 - What needs to be undertaken to be ‘delivery ready’ (e.g. project management arrangements, recruitment, governance structures etc.)

[Please include any programme/project management methodologies that will be followed. – maximum 300 words] A detailed Project Execution Plan has been developed by the Employer’s Agent, Turner & Townsend. The PEP is a core approved document that defines the strategy for the management and delivery of the NCEFE and the procedures for its successful completion and implementation. Copy attached. The PEP provides (at section 5) an organogram of yhr Project Team (including names of individuals), their roles and responsibilities. A full Project Directory is provided at Appendix A of the PEP. The University has a project management and Governance structure in place for the delivery of the building (see below). In addition industry engagement and strategic direction is facilitated by the Industry Advisory Board, chaired by the Keith Thornhill, Head of Food & Beverage, Siemens UK & Ireland, with representation from the Food and Drink Federation and senior executives of a additional six companies repenting HR,



Skills and manufacturing, equipment suppliers and Innovation opportunities.

7.5 - Please detail the scheme governance and organisation chart (as an attached organogram), including the name of the Senior Responsible Owner and other key post holders. Please make clear where posts are undertaken by directly employed staff or contracted resource and where post have allocated resource or still to be fulfilled.

[Please make clear where posts are undertaken by directly employed staff or contracted resource and where post have allocated resource or still to be fulfilled. – maximum 300 words]

The operation of the building is the responsibility of the Project Director, industry insight and strategic input is provided by the Industry Advisory Group, chaired by the Head of Food & Beverage, Siemens UK & Ireland. The monitoring of operations, and quality and effectiveness of delivery, which includes SCRIF and other Funder outputs is the responsibility of the Project Bord reporting into the University's leadership structure.



7.6 - STATE AID Please confirm if State Aid is applicable to this scheme. If you have received formal state aid advice from a solicitor, please provide further details below. If not, please confirm when this is expected.

Yes No

X

[Details regarding State Aid can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/state-aid. Scheme Promoters must obtain their own legal advice on State Aid]

Pinsent Masons provided State Aid advice in 2016 which was reviewed and updated by DWF in December 2017. The advice can can be summarised as follows:-

• Receipt of funding will not constitute State Aid. This is on the basis that the proportion of any economic activities will account for less than 20% of the NCEFE’s annual capacity.

• Where the University (via NCEFE) is providing support to other entities, this will be compliant with EU State Aid rules to the extent that such support [will be] at market rates or provided under business support programmes, for example as provided b the Growth Hub or Innovte UK which will satisfy their own programme Ste Aid requirements.

7.7 A - If Yes, detail the amount of state aid that will be provided and under what scheme(s). Provide any issues and anticipated mitigation plans (if applicable). Any mitigation must also be included in the project risk assessment.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/state-aid



[If notified, provide the notification number, date of notification and approval date. If a state aid scheme is relied upon (such as GBER) please provide justification. e.g. provide relevant project details which explain why the scheme is eligible against each relevant state aid criteria. If SME size is a factor please complete the Model Declaration found at the end of the Revised User Guide to the SME Definition (found at http://ec.europa.eu/growth/smes/business-friendly-environment/sme-definition_en) maximum 300 words)]

7.7 B - If No, provide an explanation as to why no State Aid is provided for this scheme making specific reference to the State Aid tests.

[Please provide justification for why the scheme is State Aid exempt] Sheffield Hallam University – the University is outside of the scope of the State aid rules as it considers that the activities of the NCEFE will fall within the definition of 'non-economic activities' (as it will constitute independent R&D for more knowledge and better understanding, including collaborative R&D and knowledge transfer activities, all intrinsic to the primary activities of the University). Any 'economic' activities will be ancillary to the main project and would not exceed 20% of the overall annual capacity. Those limited 'non-economic' activities may include for example the provision of contract research (which shall be payable at the corresponding commercial rate to the University, or if subsidised, only if the recipient fulfils the criteria stipulated within the relevant General Block Exemption Regulation ("GBER") exemption). This is confirmed in recently updated independent State Aid advice provide on 18th December 2017 by BDW. In summary, their advice concludes: “We believe the State Aid solution for this project lies in the European Commission’s 2014 R&D Framework…we believe this is most easily justified as “no State-Aid” on the basis it is a project dedicated to the delivery of predominantly (i.e. at least 80%) non-economic activities through a research infrastructure and/or research organisation”. A copy of the full advice is available on request. Industry partners/large enterprises and SMEs accessing the NCEFE – it is currently envisaged that access by such entities will be charged at the corresponding market rate. If this position were to change in the future, and subsidised support will be provided, this will be on the condition that the recipient fulfils the criteria of an applicable GBER exemption. Where such entities are unable to fulfil the requisite criteria, services/access to the facility will be provided at market rates. Where services/access to the facility is provided at market rate, no State aid will be conferred to the commercial enterprise concerned.

7.8 - RISK MANAGEMENT

Key Risks and Mitigations - What are the key risks that are likely to affect the implementation of this scheme and what measures are planned to mitigate these risks? Enclose the current Scheme Risk Log in Appendix 4.

7.9 - Confirm the total value of risk / contingency included in the cost plan and the % of total cost.

Total Risk £649,193 % of Total Cost 6%

7.10 - Top 5 Risks on Risk Log

Risk [State the risk and identify

both its probability and impact on a scale of high-

medium-low]

Mitigation [State how you will mitigate the risk]

Owner [State who is responsible for

mitigating this risk]

http://ec.europa.eu/growth/smes/business-friendly-environment/sme-definition_en



1. Delays to delivery programme and impact on Funder conditions

Bi weekly project team meetings. Close consultation with funders. Clear understanding that milestones must be met by the design and construction team. A small allowance for slippage. Increased programme certainty as RIBA 4 Design is confirmed and project starts on site

Project Manager reporting to the Project Board.

2. Compliance and MHCLG Funder Conditions

The single item most likely to result in clawback is procurement, which has now bene reviewed and deemed compliant by MHCLG. State Aid and publicity will be reviewed regularly by the Project Board

The Project Board.

3.Budget certainty Will be achieved at |RIBA Stage 4 sign off in August. Contingencies are in place

The bi weekly project team reporting to the project board

4.Not achieving BREEAM Excellent and impact on ESIF funding conditions

All elements of the design and construction are monitored by a BREEAM advisor. Monitoring currently indicates an outcome of 75% against a required target of 70% to achieve BREEAM excellent. in the unlikely event of not achieving the required standard there maybe withholding of ESIF funds of between 5% and 10%, this is underwritten by the University..

The Project board

5.State Aid Compliance

The capital development and revenue operation has been subject to advice and review. The major risks are on completion at operational stage. These relate to commercial activity and fair and equal access for clients. Systems will be put in place to monitor client usage charge out rates and any possible subsided activity or non-commercial activity in order to ensure compliance with regulations.

Project board and Finance Directorate

7.11 - STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT Please complete the table below detailing key stakeholders that will have known involvement and what their involvement will be. Enclose the full Scheme Stakeholder Map in Appendix 5. (max. 300 words) [Identify private partners/ other stakeholder involved in the project and explain how other partner’s delivery activity may impact on the scheme. If this scheme is reliant on private partners / stakeholders to deliver outputs, please indicate any discussions, procurement, negotiations or processes undertaken or planned – maximum 80 words]

Stakeholder name Nature of engagement

Outcome of engagement to date

Follow on actions

Food and Drink Federation on behalf of food companies

Stakeholder, representatives the Industry advisory Board

Have developed the focus of the NCEFE, the equipment fit out and sector priorities.

To guide the industry priorities and facilities with national, international and supply chain opportunities.



The Growth Hub

Through the Sheffield Innovation Programme and delivery of innovation services for SMEs

A critical pipeline for SME engagement and referral between the two projects and other agencies

Develop a food sector manufacturing and engagement strategy.

Sheffield City Region SMEs, particularly in Food and manufacturing related activities.

Broad based across a range of sectors, supplemented by developing food sector focused initiatives

Over 40 SMEs in the manufacturing and food sectors engaged in workshops on food related topics.

Step up activity and convert into longer term collaborative R&D and supply chain opportunities.

Innovate UK and RCUK

As the primary funders of collaborative R&D and delivery agencies of the Industrial strategy.

4 funded projects with industry to date involving SHU as R&D partner, see section 4.1

Increase the level and scope of activity and ensure improved opportunities for SCR SMEs

Providers of R&D services to the Food Sector and other manufacturing sectors

For example food sector R&D provision at the Universities of Nottingham and Lincoln and opportunities linked to the AMRC.

Joint development of skills and Higher Degree apprentice programmes, and joint submission for collaborative funding opportunities.

Create an integrate offer for the benefit of SMEs in the SCR. Develop stronger links between the NCEFE, AMRC and Factory 2050to identify and develop technologies with applications in the Food Manufacturing sector.

7.12 - MONITORING & EVALUATION Detail in full how the scheme will be monitored and performance managed to assess whether objectives, milestones and targets are being met. (max. 300 words)

[Please specify what resources will be made available for this evaluation process, when this will be completed and when SCR can expect to receive a copy of any report produced through this process – maximum 200 words] The construction and building delivery programme is described above, in sections 7.4 to 7.6 and overseen by the Project Board reporting to the board of Governors. The Project Board membership includes;

o Chair R Eccleston PVC Research and Innovation o M Howarth Director NCEFE o W Cranton Assistant Dean Research and Business Development, Faculty of ACES o C McLennan Head of Finance, Faculty of ACES o D Sugden Head of Technical Services, Faculty of ACES o M Swales Director Estates and Facilities o D Ladbury Director Estates o C Dales Project Manager, Estates o C Hamilton Communications Manager, Estates

The Project Board meets monthly and will continue beyond the construction phase and be responsible for the monitoring of the NCEFE revenue operations, delivery and funder compliance. A summative assessment and evaluation consultant is being commissioned, the tender is at draft stage which will review SHU's portfolio of three ESIF projects, which are both capital and revenue, and complementary in their focus on support for SCR based SMEs. A copy of the brief is available if required and we will align and incorporate any evaluation requirements of the SCRIF programme within this



commission. The report template should include oversight of the methodology and purpose relating to the three projects under review;

• background and context • purpose • target audience • objectives and scope • questions and tasks • approach and methodology • timing and deliverables • management arrangements and where relevant project specific topics, for example; • service users experience • value for money • the impact and added value of the project • lessons learnt from the project • costs against predicted costs (including a cost benefit analysis) • the views of partner organisations • recommendations for future delivery and sustainability.

SHU have also appointed an independent external Monitoring Surveyor, HERA, to ensure compliance with the ESIF Funding Agreement in terms of regulatory compliance, procurement, State Aid and draw-down. This role can be extended to incorporate any SCRIF requirements.

7.13 - Does the scheme have any monitoring obligations for other funders? If yes, please outline these obligations. (max. 100 words)

[If yes, please outline these obligations. This should include any timescales for achieving certain milestones, any “calls” on certain outputs, and approvals – maximum 200 words As noted above the Summative assessment is a requirement of MHCLG, and will also be a practical operational document to inform future operations.

7.14 - Detail how the scheme will be evaluated to assess whether stated benefits, outcomes and outputs have been realised and whether objectives have been met. Please also specify what resources will be made available for this evaluation and the planned procurement method. (max. 200 words)

[Please specify what resources will be made available for this evaluation process, when this will be completed and when SCR can expect to receive a copy of any report produced through this process – maximum 200 words] The summative assessment is an ongoing process over the active life of ESIF funding. It will require the development of a logic model and project plan on commissioning of the consultant and an end report on completion, in the case of NCEFE, summer 2019. The end report will be shared with funders, and in the case of capital projects will be received by the Project and industry advisory boards to inform the development of effective monitoring and review mechanisms for service delivery and operations. Following the formal completion f the summative assessment, the University has a continuing committed to an annual review of operations, outputs and funder compliance. Monitoring and reporting will be the responsibility of the Project Director. outcomes will be reviewed and actioned by the NCEFE Project board.



MANAGEMENT DIMENSION ASSESSMENT (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE ASSESSOR)

Is there a clear project management and delivery plan?

Are scheme milestones sufficiently mapped out and realistic?

Has the scheme got an adequate understanding of State Aid requirements and an approach to deal with any obligations?

Are the levels of risk acceptable and capable of being managed?

Are monitoring and evaluation procedures in place?

Document Sign Off

9 – DECLARATION AND SIGN OFF

On signing the Full Business Case the applicant agrees to the following:

1. The Sheffield City Region (SCR) Executive Team is a public body and may have to disclose

contents of this application on request. This application will be shared with the appropriate

SCR Board including the Combined Authority and LEP. Once a grant is agreed, we are required

to publish information about the scheme, including the agreed Full Business Case, on our

website for information. For this purpose, you may wish to also send a redacted copy (with

reasoning for any redaction including commercial confidentiality elements which the SCR will

consider) of a completed Full Business Case.

2. LGF support is not agreed unless and until a Grant Funding Agreement has been executed by

both parties and that acceptance of this Full Business Case by the SCR does not in any way

signify that funding approval is guaranteed.

3. To the best of your knowledge, all the information that has been provided in this proposal is

true and correct. You acknowledge that the information provided will inform any future

contract, should a decision be made to support the scheme.

4. You will comply with due diligence requirements appropriate to this scheme. This will be

conducted by the SCR Executive Team and further details will be provided if the scheme is

approved.

Person responsible for the application (Chief Executive or relevant Executive Director in your organisation)

Officer name:

Role: Economic Policy Development Manager



Date: 12 June 2018

Counter signatory – Chief Finance and Planning Officer

Officer name:

Role: Chief Finance and Planning Officer

Date: 21 September 2018

For SCR Use Only

Scheme Reference Number:

Date Received/ Accepted:

Version Number:

Summary of Amendments: (if applicable)

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE ASSESSOR)

Please summarise your assessment of the scheme’s Strategic Case and set out any recommendations.

Please summarise your assessment of the scheme’s Commercial Case and set out any recommendations.

Please summarise your assessment of the scheme’s Economic Case and set out any recommendations.

Please summarise your assessment of the scheme’s Financial Case and set out any recommendations.

Please summarise your assessment of the scheme’s Management Case and set out any recommendations.

Summarise your overall assessment of the scheme and recommendations for SCR.

Documents

Full Business Case · Full Business Case INFRASTRUCTURE (NON-TRANSPORT) Date of Issue - May 2018 2 1.3 - Please provide an update on any key changes and developments since the submission