Design Review and Gap Analysis: knowing what a rating will cost before committing to it.

A scorecard against the target rating system showing where the design currently stands, and a prioritised list of the measures needed to reach the intended level, with the discipline responsible and the design stage by which each must be decided. It converts a certification target into a work plan rather than an intention.

Ideally at the end of concept or schematic design, when the scorecard can still influence orientation, envelope and systems. It is also worth doing at any point a project's certification target is questioned: before registration, at a change of design team, or when a client asks whether a higher level is reachable.

Yes, but the findings narrow. Credits tied to siting, massing, envelope and system selection are largely closed by then, and the remaining moves are in specification, commissioning, operations and documentation. The honest outcome at that stage is often a realistic level lower than the original target, which is still more useful than discovering it at submission.

That depends on who has to be satisfied. A public-sector or centrally funded project often needs GRIHA; a commercial developer usually finds IGBC most recognised domestically; international tenants and investors ask for LEED; and development-finance lenders tend to want EDGE. Where no one has specified, the analysis compares what each system would cost this particular design to achieve.

No. It establishes what is achievable and what must be done, but the level is awarded by the certifying body on verified documentation, and points claimed without defensible evidence are not points earned. We therefore plan with margin above a level threshold rather than sitting exactly on it.

The gap analysis is a diagnostic: it can be commissioned independently, including as a second opinion on work someone else is doing. Full certification consultancy carries the project through registration, design integration, documentation and review to the award. Many clients start with the analysis to size the commitment before appointing for the full cycle.

Yes, and that is a common brief when a submission has attracted review comments or a target looks at risk. The review checks the scorecard's assumptions against the current design and the actual credit requirements, and identifies which contested credits are recoverable and which should be replaced with alternatives.